March 31, 2021
From The Anarchist Library

The Anarchist Library (Mirror)

Tue, 30 Mar 2021 23:02:55 +0100

About the project
Mon, 17 Aug 2020 03:58:12 +0100
<div><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p><strong>E-mail:</strong> </p>
<p><strong>Live chat:</strong> See <a class=”text-amuse-link text-amuse-is-single-link” href=””>/special/webchat</a></p>
<p><strong>Wiki:</strong> <a class=”text-amuse-link text-amuse-is-single-link” href=””></a></p>
<hr />
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a> is (despite its name) <em>an</em> archive focusing on anarchism, anarchist texts, and texts of interest for anarchists. </p>
<p> Within the scope of our use of the term “anarchism” we have been quite broad, but <em>broad does not mean infinite</em>, and basically shrinks down to a set of ideas against the State <strong>and</strong> the capital. This immediately rules out the so-called “anarcho-capitalism”, “anarcho-nationalism” and similar crap. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>What is so special about this site?</div>
<p> Often, you may find the texts hosted here on other sites that also aim to be digital libraries, and often the texts are taken from them (the source is always listed). But this library provides (together with the on-line version of each text) one or more high quality PDFs in various sizes and file formats, as well as its plain text sources, and an EPUB version for mobile platforms. We actively encourage the DIY printing and the distribution of the texts, so you have the “imposed” version for Letter paper (USA) and A4 (rest of the world): just print double side, fold and clip, and the booklet is ready. </p>
<p> The site provides a <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>way</a> for distributors and friends to change the layout of the PDFs and to create collections of an arbitrary number of texts (1 or more). See <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>the bookbuilder page</a>. </p>
<p> The site also provides an <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>advanced search engine</a>. </p>
<p> All these features come with some responsibility for the people who want to contribute to the library. We ask that uploaders contribute a <em>logical</em> representation of the text, with headings, emphasis, quotation blocks, etc. marked up appropriately. The site provides some tools (inside the web interface) to make this process easy, but some attention and some care is still required. Please be sure to read the <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>manual</a> if you plan to join the project for the mid- to long-term. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>I have a text I’d like to see in the library. May I submit it?</div>
<p> Yes, you may! You don’t need an account. Just click <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>Add to Library</a> and read the instructions. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>I uploaded something, but you censored me!</div>
<p> When we choose not to publish something, usually we contact the uploader, providing a explanation. Problematic texts are always <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>discussed</a>. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>What about my zine?</div>
<p> If you want to publish your zine here, keep in mind that we can’t accept PDFs or raw scans. The texts here are processed to produce various formats, including but not limited to PDF. </p>
<p> Even if inserting images in the text is fully supported, this archive may not be the best solution for graphically heavy texts. </p>
<p> So, if you think your text makes sense only together with its specific layout, the place to publish it is <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>zinelibrary</a>, not the library. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>What about my scans?</div>
<p> Texts freshly scanned are welcome, but you have to OCR and format them first. Broken, unreadable texts are rejected. We prefer quality over quantity. Work on your text and make it shine, don’t throw it up as shit on the grass. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Hey, you started without me. Can I join you?</div>
<p> Sure, you can join the crew. We have a mailing list ( and a <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>IRC channel</a>. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>What about support for other languages?</div>
<p> It’s a reality. There are already projects in: <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a>, <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>Spanish</a>, <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>French</a>, <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>Dutch</a>, <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>Danish</a>, <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>Russian</a>, <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>Italian</a>, <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>Macedonian</a>, <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>German</a>, <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>Swedish</a>, <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>Polish</a>, <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>Finnish</a>, <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>Turkish</a>. </p>
<p> If you are interested in creating a new language project, please read this <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>documentation</a> first, and then please contact us. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Tell us about your technology.</div>
<p> All the various components use free software and the code is freely available at <a class=”text-amuse-link text-amuse-is-single-link” href=””></a>. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Why don’t you do X</div>
<p> Perhaps because we haven’t got around to it. Perhaps we have other reasons for not doing X. If you want X to happen at the Anarchist Library, feel free to <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>log onto the IRC channel</a> and talk to us about how X will rock our world, and how to make X happen. We are probably open to do it. </p>
<div class=”amw-teaser-no-ellipsis”></div>

Announcements archive
Sun, 17 Nov 2019 09:07:57 +0100
<div><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> October 6th, 2015 </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>An update from the Anarchist Library: Fall 2015</div>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Getting old? or just the weather…</div>
<p> Greetings from the labyrinths of the library. The anarchist library project has been aging slowly with time and brushing the dust off of its pages by forking out into new and exciting paths. The project now provides texts in eight different languages. The German and Swedish language libraries are the most recent additions. The project also offers libraries in the Serbo-Croatian, Macedonian, Finnish, Russian, Spanish, and the English languages. As always, your participation in this project by helping upload and edit texts of interest to you is what helps make the archives wonderful. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Languages:</div>
<p> If you are interested in starting a new library in your native language (or one that you are highly fluent in), please contact us via email or by dropping by the IRC chat. We are willing to provide full support to help get your library project up and running. </p>
<p> Email: <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a></p>
<p> IRC: <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a> (IRC etiquette means that we are not always there and often AFK IRL, so please have patience) </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Social Media:</div>
<p> The library has also recently made a Twitter robot that automatically tweets out the newest editions and edits to the world. It’s still in the beta stages, so please bear with it as a small foray into the world of robots and social media. </p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a></p>
<p> In other social media news, some of you may know that the library started a Facebook page years ago as well. It seems that this page, while generally disdained and neglected (and even hated) for some years by the librarians – has somehow become really popular. It now has almost 6,000 members in the public group (is this something to celebrate?). The page is meant as a tool for discussion and sharing of anarchist texts and not as a place for posting memes or heating up sectarian issues. </p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a> (it’s behind a wall and you must be logged in to view + added to group by mods) </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Mirrors:</div>
<p> In place of having a torrent as we have done before in the past, friends have been kind enough to help provide a series of static website mirrors setup in case anything were to ever happen to the main servers. You can find them here: </p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a></p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a></p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a></p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a> (this mirror is beautiful, but not currently updated) </p>
<p> One is able to get the full batch of texts from the library a la the torrent by using tools for recursive downloading like wget for Linux, although we are unaware of any tools like this existing on Windoze. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>How to help:</div>
<p> And on a closing note, the library is interested in searching out anarchist libraries IRL or AFK. While Infoshops are grand and play a vital role in the community, we are really looking for actual libraries or special collections that contain anarchist history. If you are aware of any anarchist special collections in the world please do let us know or help edit the wiki page on this subject (does a resource like this already exist?). It would be interesting information for those interested in research and finding lost gems in the anarchist canon on their travels. </p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a></p>
<p> Here is a 4 step crash course in how you can help the library as well- </p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a></p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>The Libraries:</div>
<p> the Swedish library: </p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a> (93 texts) </p>
<p> the German library: </p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a> (268 texts) </p>
<p> the Spanish library: </p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a> (403 texts) also on GNU Social: </p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a></p>
<p> the Serbo-Croatian library: </p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a> (400 texts) </p>
<p> the Macedonian library: </p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a> (119 texts) </p>
<p> the Finnish library: </p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a> (160 texts) </p>
<p> the Russian library: </p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a> (354 texts) </p>
<p> the English library: </p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=”https://theanarchistlibrary”></a> (2,436 texts) </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>October 4, 2014: a shiny new library</div>
<p> The library has been upgraded, with a couple of notable improvements: </p>
<p> new mobile-friendly layout </p>
<p> enhanced bookbuilder </p>
<p> improved PDF style </p>
<p> The old files have been archived in a torrent release, which you can grab here: <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>anarchist-libraries-2014-10-04.torrent</a>. </p>
<p> The torrent ships the usual collection of ISO files, meant to be extracted or burned on a CD (for smaller libraries) or DVD and includes all the libraries (English, Spanish, Finnish, Macedonian, Serbo-Croatian, Russian). </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>April 2014</div>
<p> A lightweight torrent (English only, HTML + sources) has been hacked together. You can grab it here: <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>theanarchistlibrary-en-2014-04-25.torrent</a>. </p>
<p> The torrent doesn’t come from the library, but from <code>reti</code> who wanted (and managed) to put it together. Thanks! </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>December 2013 update (2)</div>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>The bright side</div>
<p> The libraries have got a new mobile-friendly adaptive layout. Feedback welcome. </p>
<p> A technical tutorial about PDF compilation has been published at <a class=”text-amuse-link text-amuse-is-single-link” href=””>/special/recompile</a></p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Sun, 17 Nov 2019 09:07:57 +0100
<div><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>The torrent</div>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>A torrent release is available here (January 22, 2016)</a></p>
<p> It ships the CD/DVD images with the full archive of this site and of its sister sites: </p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>Anarchistische Bibliothek</a></p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>Anarhistička biblioteka</a></p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>Anarkistinen kirjasto</a></p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>Библиотека Анархизма</a></p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>La Biblioteca Anarquista</a></p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>Анархистичка библиотека</a></p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>The Anarchist Library</a></p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>Det Anarkistiska Biblioteket</a></p>
<p> PDF of various size, plain and imposed, HTML, EPUB, TeX, source files are included. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Search plugin for [[][Calibre]]</div>
<p> Thanks to <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>meskio</a>, you can search and download the texts directly from Calibre. </p>
<p> See <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>the Calibre store plugin wiki page</a> for help. </p>
<p> You can download the plugin here: <a class=”text-amuse-link text-amuse-is-single-link” href=””></a> (last updated August 24, 2012). </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Code</div>
<p> The code used to build, run and maintain the site is freely available. You can visit <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a> to get it. </p>
<p> Documentation, credits, etc. is included. </p>
<div class=”amw-teaser-no-ellipsis”></div>

Live Chat (IRC)
Tue, 10 Nov 2020 04:58:01 +0100
<div><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>IRC</div>
<p><strong>webchat</strong> : <a class=”text-amuse-link text-amuse-is-single-link” href=””></a></p>
<p> or point your preferred IRC client towards the server || port (regular, SSL, and via Tor): </p>
<p><strong>server:</strong> </p>
<p><strong>channel:</strong> #library </p>
<p><strong>matrix:</strong> matrix bridge 2 IRC #library: </p>
<p> || port 6667 <br /> || port 6697 (for SSL) <br /> km3jy7nrj3e2wiju.onion || port 6667 || (and) 6697 <br />
<div class=”amw-teaser-no-ellipsis”></div>

Recompiling the formats
Sun, 17 Nov 2019 09:07:57 +0100
<div><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Introduction</div>
<p> The texts stored on the libraries are formatted with a dialect of the Emacs Muse markup, which is described in deep details in the <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””>manual</a>. </p>
<p> The files are pure plain text (with the popular and ubiquitous UTF-8 encoding), and you can edit them with any editor. </p>
<p> The following how-to explains how to install on your very own machine the needed code to generate the HTML, EPUB and PDF (imposed and not) formats, starting from a <code>muse</code> formatted plain text file. You can retrieve those files for any text on the library downloading the “plain text source” file from the list of available downloads. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Installation</div>
<p> The programs are written in Perl. Every GNU/Linux operating system comes with Perl installed. They are supposed to work on Mac and Windows too, but you have to find your way to get Perl installed (together with a way to install modules from CPAN, the repository of Perl code, usually the program called <code>App::cpanminus</code>, which is invoked with the command <code>cpanm</code>). </p>
<p> Given that Debian and Ubuntu are the most used distributions around, the following tutorial will assume that the user run one of them. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Essentials</div>
<p> Install <code>cpanm</code> to retrieve the modules from CPAN and the template engine. Please become root before proceeding (Ubuntu: <code>sudo su -</code>, Debian: <code>su -</code>, please note the dash, it’s part of the command). </p><pre class=”example”>
# apt-get install perl-modules perl-doc
cpanminus libtemplate-tiny-perl
libcam-pdf-perl libpdf-api2-perl
</pre><p> Then install the needed code from CPAN: </p><pre class=”example”>
# cpanm Text::Amuse::Compile
</pre><div style=”font-weight:bold”>Full-featured installation (PDF)</div>
<p> To produce PDFs you need TeXlive. In theory, only a subset is needed, but here for brevity we install the full version. Ok, it’s 1 gigabyte and half of download, about 3 as installed size, but nowadays disk space is cheap. <a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[1]</a> Keep in mind that you can still get EPUB and HTML without this. </p><pre class=”example”>
# apt-get install texlive-full fonts-sil-charis
</pre><p> This will install the executable <code></code> which by default will get you all the formats provided by the library. </p><pre class=”example”>

–2014-05-17 23:28:41–
Resolving (…
Connecting to (||:80… connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response… 200 OK
Length: 49128 (48K) [text/plain]
Saving to: ‘john-zerzan-tonality-and-totality.muse’

100%[=======================================&gt;] 49,128 107K/s in 0.4s

2014-05-17 23:28:42 (107 KB/s) — ‘john-zerzan-tonality-and-totality.muse’ saved [49128/49128]

$ –pdf –epub –html –a4-pdf
Using Text::Amuse 0.43, Text::Amuse::Compiler 0.43, PDF::Imposition 0.14
Working on john-zerzan-tonality-and-totality.muse file in /tmp
* Created john-zerzan-tonality-and-totality.html
* Created john-zerzan-tonality-and-totality.epub
* Created john-zerzan-tonality-and-totality.a4.pdf
* Created john-zerzan-tonality-and-totality.tex
* Created john-zerzan-tonality-and-totality.pdf
</pre><p> Please see <code> –help</code> for more information. </p>
<div class=”right”>
<p> — Marco (marco -AT- </p>
<p class=”fnline”><a class=”footnotebody” href=”#”>[1]</a> If you manage to strip down the installation to the minimum, please let me know, and I’ll update the tutorial. </p>
<div class=”amw-teaser-no-ellipsis”></div>

The Anarchist Library
Thu, 25 Mar 2021 04:57:57 +0100
<div><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div class=”center”>
<p> Announcing The Anarchist Library in Korean, for the Korean language anarchists! <br /><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””><strong><code>The Korean Anarchist Library</code></strong></a></p>
<div class=”amw-teaser-no-ellipsis”></div>

The Torrent: 2020, winter
Fri, 21 Feb 2020 04:57:47 +0100
<div><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>The Anarchist Library on torrent as of February 17, 2020</div>
<p><em>1.6 gb 7zip, English library website mirror – PDF, MUSE, TEX, HTML, and EPUB</em></p>
<p> Torrent &amp; Magnet link: </p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a></p>
<p><a class=”text-amuse-link” href=”magnet:?xt=urn:btih:E760634FBF604A8E3CE4680EBCD370FC3212762F&amp;dn=The%2BAnarchist%2BLibrary%2C%2BEnglish%2B-%2BFebruary%2B17%2C%2B2020&amp;;;”>Magnet Link</a></p>
<p> Please seed if you can. </p>
<div class=”amw-teaser-no-ellipsis”></div>

George Woodcock – Pierre-Joseph Proudhon
Tue, 30 Mar 2021 23:02:55 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: George Woodcock<br><strong>Title</strong>: Pierre-Joseph Proudhon<br><strong>Subtitle</strong>: A biography<br><strong>Date</strong>: 1972<br><strong>Notes</strong>: First published 1956. Second edition 1972.<br><strong>Source</strong>:<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”><strong>Acknowledgements</strong></div>
<p> The completion of this book would have been immeasurably more difficult had it not been for the encouragement and financial assistance given me by the John Simon Guggenheim Foundation of New York, who granted me a Fellowship in 1951 for the purpose of studying Proudhon and his times. I am also greatly indebted to Mlle Suzanne Henneguy and Mme E. Fauré-Fremiet, the granddaughters of Proudhon, for allowing me to inspect Proudhon’s manuscript diaries and other documents in their possession and for the time and patience they devoted to answering my queries. Among the French students of Proudhon and of the movements influenced by him, M. l’Abbé Pierre Haubtmann, M. Alexandre Marc and M. André Prudhommeaux were particularly generous with their advice, while Mr Arthur Lehning drew my attention to material on Proudhon in the collections of the International Institute for Social History. Finally, throughout the preparation of this book my wife rendered invaluable assistance in research, in typing and, above all, in helpful criticism. </p>
<div class=”right”>
<p> Vancouver, 1955 </p>
<div class=”right”>
<p> G. W. </p>
<div class=”float_image_f”><img alt=”g-w-george-woodcock-pierre-joseph-proudhon-2.png” class=”embedimg” src=”” /><div class=”caption”>Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and his Children<br />by Gustave Courbet<br />Painting in the Petit Palais, Paris</div>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”><strong>A Personal Preface to the Third Edition</strong></div>
<p> Just before I began this introduction to the new — third — edition of my biography of Proudhon, I came across a salutary statement by the subject of it. ‘I distrust an author who pretends to be consistent with himself after an interval of twenty-five years.’ Proudhon, of course, took a pride in inconsistency, which he saw as the only way of dealing with the mutability of our perceptions of the world, just as he proudly called himself ‘a man of paradox,’ but his remark was true to the extent that the only living thought is that which has retained its power to change. </p>
<p><em>Pierre-Joseph Proudhon</em> was originally published thirty-one years ago, and I began writing it thirty-five years ago, so that it takes me even farther back in my career than Proudhon’s quarter of a century. It was by no means my first book, but I have always regarded it as the end of my literary apprenticeship, the mature book with which I became — if not a master — at least an accomplished journeyman. And it is still my favourite, apart from poetry, among my earlier books. </p>
<p> Since I wrote it, my ideas, like those of Proudhon, have gone through many modifications. Even at the time when it was written I was undergoing radical changes of attitude. Before I decided to write <em>Proudhon</em> I had been a confirmed anarchist of an already old-fashioned kind, since for a while I believed, like Kropotkin and other nineteenth-century pioneers in the movement, that the anarchist society was an immediately proximate possibility. Even when the hopes of achieving it in Spain dissolved with Franco’s victory in 1938, I still, like many of my associates, believed that the outcome of World War II might well be a wave of worldwide unrest and rebellion out of which a new society would emerge in which people would have the good sense to break the moulds of power rather than merely transfer authority from one set of rulers to the other. </p>
<p> That, of course, did not happen, and at the same time I had become disillusioned with the sectarian narrowness of so many old-movement anarchists. I moved aside rather than away, without abandoning my beliefs in the essential anarchist teachings of free co-operation, mutual aid, decentralization, and federalism, though I ceased to share my former comrades’ romantic belief that they could be achieved by violent means, which I had come to recognize as another kind of power. How more completely, after all, can one exercise power over others than by killing them, even if the killing is in the name of liberty? </p>
<p> For some years I did not even call myself an anarchist because of the name’s association with attitudes which I felt to be at best naive and at worst anti-libertarian. It was at this period that I was drawn to Proudhon, in part as a reaction against the ‘true-believer’ phase on which I had embarked in my book on Kropotkin, <em>The Anarchist Prince</em>. Orthodox anarchists in the 1940s based their criticisms of present society and their proposals for the future on Kropotkin’s communist anarchism and Bakunin’s insurrectionism, with revolutionary syndicalism thrown in for flavour, and they looked on Proudhon, as they looked on Godwin, with a mixture of suspicion and condescension. True, he was the first man openly and proudly to call himself an anarchist. But his Bakuninist-Kropotkinist critics saw in him a fatal tendency towards gradualism, a small craftsman kind of individualism, and an obsession with credit schemes like the People’s Bank which struck them as suspiciously bourgeois. They had not read enough of his books — the best are not translated into English — to realize that all the basic aspects of their own teaching were there in Proudhon, together with a distrust of excessively close association among producers which he shared with Godwin though not with Kropotkin and the syndicalists. They also forgot that their own master, Bakunin, had once declared that ‘Proudhon is the master of us all.’ </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Anonymous – Eat the rich
Tue, 30 Mar 2021 12:17:59 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Anonymous<br><strong>Title</strong>: Eat the rich<br><strong>Subtitle</strong>: My experience in hospitality work during the pandemic<br><strong>Date</strong>: Mar 29 2021<br><strong>Source</strong>:<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> With a provisional date set for the gradual reopening of the hospitality sector in UK, now seems a prescient moment to reflect upon the experiences of hospitality staff during the Covid-19 pandemic. </p>
<hr />
<p> While many staff will feel grateful to have a return date set in their diaries (albeit provisionally), we should reject the much posited idea of a ‘return to normal’. Accepting such a move lets both government and employers – many of whom have behaved disgracefully in the last twelve months – off the hook. While the government’s furlough scheme has ensured hospitality staff have had a source of income and have jobs to return to in May, we should not accept the bare minimum as anywhere close to enough. </p>
<p> For starters, there seems little reason why staff couldn’t have been paid at 100% of their normal monthly pay, as opposed to the 80% the scheme currently offers. Given the base rate for hospitality is often minimum wage (and even less for those under twenty-one or on apprenticeship wages), arbitrarily cutting 20% of earnings only heaps financial pressure on those already struggling. While work may have stopped temporarily, food, clothes and other basic necessities cost no less, while mortgages and rent to landlords (not known for their compassion in times of crisis) still need to be paid. </p>
<p> Another pitfall of the furlough scheme, which some of my colleagues experienced first hand, is its reliance upon the competence and honesty of employers. Management teams fiddling with staff hours to make meagre savings is not a new phenomenon, but in the context of furlough – where staff pay is already reduced – the practice is even more reprehensible. For example, a staff member with two children will work around child care, so they may do two 10 shifts and one shorter 5 hour shift a week, totalling 25 hours. However, there have been instances of employers under-reporting staff hours, so the person working 25 hours in normal times is only paid (again at 80%) for 20. Such discrepancies are not only grossly irresponsible, they hurt workers in an industry already both low-paid and precarious. </p>
<p> Rumours of a second instalment of the Chancellor’s ‘Eat out to help out’ scheme will also fill those working in the hospitality sector with a sense of foreboding. While much may have been made of the scheme in August – the press and government blustered plenty of platitudes about how it would ‘restart’ the economy – the reality for those working it was hellish. While the big chains made plenty of lip-service about staff health and safety being a priority during the pandemic, this sits in stark contrast to what myself and many colleagues experienced: management teams cannot claim to value the wellbeing of staff while they continue to cut corners, solely to maximise profits for unaccountable CEOs and board members. While the UK’s first lockdown was undoubtedly lifted too soon, it is not within the remit of this article to offer analysis of every (of the many) government failures from during the last 12 months. </p>
<p> Hospitality businesses reopened last July under the assurance they would implement measures to ensure safe social distancing – this included things like reduced capacity and introducing track and trace forms for customers. While the nature of work in the industry does make social distancing nigh on impossible at times (especially for those of us working in already cramped kitchens), it was telling just how quickly senior management teams abandoned all pretence of safety once ‘Eat out to help out’ was launched. Cramming in table upon table of guests would be negligent behaviour at any juncture, but during a pandemic there is no justification. </p>
<p> Another trend prevalent throughout the scheme was staff sickness, owing to overwork and understaffing. While anyone who has ever worked a bar or restaurant job knows there will be certain periods in a week (often a Friday and Saturday) where you will be busy, staff being worked at an unrelenting pace – there were a couple of days were staff were forced to go without breaks – for a month is not healthy. </p>
<p> Management machinations did not stop at understaffing and overworking during ‘Eat out to help out’. As the months progressed (and Covid cases rose), more and more staff had to take time off to self-isolate. While frustrating, the bosses did at least attempt to maintain a semblance of transparency at first by keeping staff informed about self isolation. Such transparency soon vanished however, when the head chef tested positive for Covid. Despite displaying symptoms (a dry cough and fatigue), the person in question filled in the daily Covid check (for which normal staff were routinely badgered) online declaring himself fit for work and attended work on at least two separate occasions. Once the positive test had been shared with kitchen staff, people were both upset and angry. A number of staff had been in close contact with the head chef – who had insisted he was fine – so were justifiably concerned they could have contracted Covid themselves. Rather than condemning the head chef’s behaviour and allowing other staff to self isolate, which would have been the correct procedure, management instead decided to close ranks and add further deceit to the situation: at a gathering of the kitchen team, we were informed not to seek Covid tests and to carry on as normal, as well as being told the head chef had followed the ‘correct protocols’. Such blatant gaslighting would have been deceitful enough, but kitchen staff were also told not to share the news of the head chef’s positive test, as this could cause ‘disruption to the business’. While the above is just one example in one industry, it is indicative of a wider issue present throughout the pandemic: namely the interests of Capital and its lackeys taking precedent over the safety and wellbeing of the working class. Data on Covid deaths in the UK from last year evidences this point, showing those working in precarious industries – including chefs – far more likely to die from Covid than the general population. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Anarchist Yondae (Anarchist Solidarity) – On the Upcoming by-election of Korea
Tue, 30 Mar 2021 08:09:02 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Anarchist Yondae (Anarchist Solidarity)<br><strong>Title</strong>: On the Upcoming by-election of Korea<br><strong>Subtitle</strong>: The &lt;Anarchist Solidarity&gt;‘s Standpoint<br><strong>Date</strong>: 2021.03.29<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 2021-03-30 from<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> 1. In Korea, the by-election for local governmental heads and local assembly is being held in 10 days from today. And we do not care what is going on during the run-up period. </p>
<p> 2. We deny the concept of social transformation through election. Moreover, we do not even believe that changing dominator’s name by voting has any chance of gradually(and that’s surely not radically) improving the society. We believe that the only way to radically transform, or to gradually improve the society is nothing else but the direct action of popular masses, who are organizing themselves and fight for themselves according to their interest and need. </p>
<p> 3. But this Korean by-election do not even deserve to be opposed logically, or ideogically, for no candidate in this election is talking about improving the society. They don’t even bother to tell the popular mass that “We good. The other party bad”. They do not bother to pretend that they have the “vision for the better society.” They are keep saying of “judging the government” or “cleaning up the old evils”. They are now openly declaring that “We are lesser evil, so vote for lesser evil.” </p>
<p> 4. So, Here we ask, what is “evil”, basically? We &lt;Anarchist Solidarity&gt; believe that the system itself is evil. It is the system where people are masters of everything just a day in few years, when they are being begged for a vote, while they are degenerated to slaves for rest hundreds days. It is the system where the strike of working mass is suppressed by the police when liberals are in the office, while the strike is suppressed by the riot police when conservatives are in the office. It is the system where whoever is in office, the state violence tramp the poplar struggle, while the capitalists travel with helicopters to save them from even glaring at the struggle. The system is “evil” by itself. </p>
<p> 5. Therefore, the problem of “worst evil” or “lesser evil” does not mean the problem of relative evilness for us. We see it as nothing but narrow difference in the way of maintaining the evil system. We do not care whether conservartive parties maintain the system trivial way, or the “National Revolutionary Party”<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[1]</a> maintains it somewhat “creatively”. It does not make any difference. </p>
<p> 6. Should we vote for the “progressive” candidates, or “working class parties”, then? Let us put aside the question of “Are those “progressive parties”, which were trying to be parasites to the conservative party or those who were even denied by the conservatives while doing that, really “progressive”?”.<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[2]</a> Let us just concern whether it is possible to ignite social transformation, or at least social improvement. </p>
<p> 6–1. First off, let us just imagine the day when those progressive parties can be elected by voting counts. The day will be revolutionary day(for it is not possible for those parties to be elected if the day is not revolutionary) when popular masses recognize the need of transforming the society. And it will be the day when the stubborn will of people through voting counts… Voting counts? Why should we limit the ability of the people to votes, not organize people’s organizations struggling through direct action even when the time is so revolutionary? Those attempt to limit people’s ability is nothing but underestimating the ability. For it is the belief that someone has to “represent” people in terms of transforming the society, for it is nearly impossible to do it by the people themselves. </p>
<p> 6–2. Otherwise, what if the day’s tough and progressive parties have no chance to be elected? What can the votes for them mean in this world of “representative democracy”, where the majority rules and political collusion be the base of political decision-making? Those “progressive”, “working class” political parties may have started off wishing to transform the system. But as the system of majority-rule automatically end as the system of median-rule, there can be only two possible future for those “progressives”. First off, shift their stance rightward. Or, be downsized to the point where their existence cannot mean anything. Let’s recall the history. Korean Democratic Labor Party(민주노동당), New Progressive Party(진보신당), The Unified Progressive Party(통합진보당), Justice Party(정의당), The Labor Party(노동당). They all ended same way. For what reason can we believe them saying “It will be different this time”, when the system is still same? </p>
<p> 6–3. What about those self-called “radicals”, who are saying they don’t expect to be elected, but just using the election for propaganda and organizing? Disregard of the fact that there is no reason to vote for them, for voting count does not affect their ostensible reason of being candidates, we find it essentially contradictable. Why can’t they use the expense, the time, the ability of their party to organize popular mass and its direct action, instead of running for the office? Can’t they construct workers’ organization just to organize working class struggle, not to recruit the campaigners for the election? </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

The Final Straw Radio interviewing Anner from Horn Anarchists – An Ethiopian Anarchist Perspective on the War in Tigray
Mon, 29 Mar 2021 06:41:03 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: The Final Straw Radio interviewing Anner from Horn Anarchists<br><strong>Title</strong>: An Ethiopian Anarchist Perspective on the War in Tigray<br><strong>Date</strong>: 2021<br><strong>Notes</strong>: An interview from The Final Straw Radio with Anner, an Ethiopian member of Horn Anarchists, an anarchist group based in east Africa. Anner talks about the group, the history of post-Junta Ethiopa, the context of the ongoing armed conflict in Tigray, the fighting factions and the displacement and violence suffered by residents of the region. Content warning: this article contains a discussion of sexual violence in the conflict.<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 2021-03-29 from<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p><strong>TFSR</strong>: Would you please introduce yourself, if you’d like, and tell us a bit about Horn Anarchists as a collective project? What are your shared values? What do you do? Where are you based, and how long have you been around? </p>
<p><strong>Anner</strong>: I go by the name Anner and I use she/her pronouns. Horn Anarchists as a collective project started about a year ago with the aim of disseminating anarchist ideas and values and the politics of the Horn. Individually, we were engaged in different anti-fascist, feminist, labor, and refugee solidarity organizing, and we later came together to bring the values of anarchism and some of our works into a shared, collective organizing. Most of what you’ve been doing in the past year has been online, since some of our members are in the diaspora, some of us are based in the Horn of Africa, and we haven’t actually been able to come together and work into a grassroots project as of yet, but we have hopes of doing that. Recently with what is happening in Tigray and the crisis, we plan to meet in Sudan to do some refugee solidarity work in Sudan for those that have been forced to flee their homes because of the genocidal war. </p>
<p><strong>TFSR</strong>: For clarification, is there a set vision of anarchism that unites folks, or is it just a set of common values, and if you could describe what those are? </p>
<p><strong>A</strong>: As a collective, the values we really uphold are those of equality, kindness, mutual aid, solidarity and voluntarism, especially some of us were radicalized through the different volunteer activities we’ve been doing. Some of us were radicalized through reading “too much of anarchist literature”, while others were radicalized by joining different organizing circles. Those are basically some of the values we all share and uphold. </p>
<p><strong>TFSR</strong>: So, modern anarchist organizing in Africa that I’ve heard of has been mostly projects in South Africa, affiliates of the ZACF, or people like Sam Mbah and the Awakening Movement, a syndicalist movement in Nigeria or in Egypt during and after the uprisings against Hosni Mubarak. Can you talk a bit about the milieu or the movement of anarchism in the Horn of Africa, and maybe, if it relates to economic more so or religious or irreligious ideas, musical or sub-cultural genres, like metal and punk, are a big thing in a lot of parts of the world around anarchist communities, or if it relates to regional or ethnic autonomy movements, I’d like to hear your thoughts. </p>
<p><strong>A</strong>: Yeah, you’re definitely right about that. Well, when we came together to form Horn Anarchists, one of the things we wanted to do was to study anarchism in the “third world”. Most of the anarchist literature we’ve been studying has been very Eurocentric, so we wanted to understand how the history of anarchism worked in our part of the world, and we haven’t had much luck in that regard. The anarchist movements or any anarchist presence we could find were in very few places: there were some in Nigeria, South Africa, Algeria, a little in Sudan and Egypt, but not a lot, especially not in the Horn. And one of the things we attribute to that is that the settlers in this part of Africa, and especially the highlands of the Horn, are very hierarchical societies that are very religious as well. The two most dominant religions are orthodox Christianity and Islam, and both are very devout to their religion, and that has maintained a very strong hierarchical community that has been passing down to generations and their religion has also been highly tied with the state and people that loved their religion, their god, also had to love the state. So anarchism has not really been welcome in our part of the world. </p>
<p> The way anarchism came in the Horn, especially in Ethiopia and Eritrea has a very interesting aspect to it, as it did not come as a movement of its own, recognized and clearly differentiated between other movements. And actually the way it comes up in history, it is when Marxist-Leninist and other communist movements, communist organizations use it to label each other to indicate that the other was less desirable than they were. They wanted to build a strong state, though a communist state, and calling the other anarchists was a way to make sure that the public loses trust and looks at them with animosity, hostility. It was a way to smear each other’s name, basically, and that’s how anarchism has been used, not anarchism per se, but the word “anarchist”, as a label. </p>
<p><strong>TFSR</strong>: Right now we’re speaking in the aftermath of a “police action” against the northern province of Tigray? And please correct me if I mistake any of this, but conducted by the central Ethiopian military that has left widespread displacement. It’s been engaged from at least two other countries plus regional and ethnic militia, widespread reports of theft and sexual assault against people in Tigray. I appreciate you coming on to share what you know, especially since the Ethiopian state has done a lot to stop word from getting out about what’s been going on there. For those unfamiliar with the politics and the history of the Horn, of Ethiopia in particular, the history of the conflicts and various state and non-state actors, and their motivations can be a bit confusing. If it’s not too much, would you mind giving us a rundown or a thumbnail sketch of the civil war and its aftermath and lay the playing field for what’s going on right now? </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Proletarios Revolucionarios – The Self-Abolition of the Proletariat As the End of the Capitalist World
Sun, 28 Mar 2021 06:21:06 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Proletarios Revolucionarios<br><strong>Title</strong>: The Self-Abolition of the Proletariat As the End of the Capitalist World<br><strong>Subtitle</strong>: (or why the current revolt doesn’t transform into revolution)<br><strong>Date</strong>: April 2020<br><strong>Notes</strong>: Here is the translation of a recent text from a comrade of the now defunct group Proletarios Revolutionarios (Quito, Ecuador) which attempts to clarify the reason why past and current struggles don’t expand from local revolts to the global revolution that needs to be assumed for the survival of the species, placing an emphasis on the need for the proletariat to not only recognize our condition and fight against the capitalist class, but to recognize the need for us to abolish our condition as proletarians itself and therefore the capitalist conditions that have created our class.<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 2021-03-28 from <a class=”text-amuse-link text-amuse-is-single-link” href=””></a> <a class=”text-amuse-link text-amuse-is-single-link” href=””></a><br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>The self-abolition of the proletariat as the end of the capitalist world (or why the current revolt doesn’t transform into revolution)</div>
<p> “Exploitation, which is necessary to sustain the economy, has in the generalized installation of capital, managed historically to overcome the attacks of the proletariat, since they have never put its central components into question” […] </p>
<p> If it were but merely a question of explaining the facts in a very pedagogical way, the day after tomorrow the old world would be left in the dust, but this is not so, the exploited feel comfortable in their chains because they are entrapped in the mercantile social relations that hide their exploitation under the veil of democratic reconciliation or of nihilistic resignation, two poles of the same ideological center.” </p>
<div class=”right”>
<p><em> — Anarquia &amp; Communismo n.11</em></p>
<p> Santiago, Chile Winter 2018 </p>
<p> “Yet at the same time, the proletariat only exists when it becomes conscious of its condition and struggles for its liberation, that is, its self-abolition, by attacking the social relations and institutions that keep it dominated and through the affirmation of its truly human interests, neither defined nor mediated by mercantile necessities” </p>
<div class=”right”>
<p><em> — Ya No Hay Vuelta Atrás</em> (Now There’s No Turning Back) n.2 </p>
<p> Santiago, Chile February 2020 </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>The fundamental contradiction of the current proletarian revolt</div>
<p> The revolt is breaking out all over the world, but all over the world the revolution is missing. Why? What follows is a tentative but forceful response. </p>
<p> The current-day reason is that this society of classes is coming out of a historical counterrevolutionary period (since approximately the 1980’s) and entering a historical period of ascension and intensification of the worldwide proletarian struggle against worldwide Capital-State (2008–2013 and 2019–202?). Which, at the same time, recently is starting to alter the correlation of forces and the conditions for a possible revolutionary situation, in view of the fact that the proletarian revolt has caused the bourgeoisie and their governments to tremble, but it still hasn’t defeated them nor sent them to the dustbin of history. As the comrades of Grupo Barbaria say, this is a “hinge period” which must be seen not as a photograph but as a film that contains flows (revolts), and ebbs (returns to normalcy), new flows and a open finale. A historical period which transits between the counterrevolution and a possible revolutionary situation at a global level; for which, nevertheless, there is still a long way to go. </p>
<p> The structural reason, or the one in the backdrop, is that the proletariat is still not a revolutionary class, despite the fact that today the capitalist crisis is more widespread and serious than ever before, and that the current global wave of revolts of the exploited and oppressed is a embryo and a milestone heading forward towards the global revolt, or at least its necessity and possibility. With a greater or lesser grade of organizational autonomy and of street violence, the proletarian class today is fighting against the capitalist order almost everywhere, but this is not sufficient: in the end, the proletariat is revolutionary or it is nothing, and it’s only revolutionary when it struggles, not for “a life that is just and dignified” as the working class, but to cease to be it. Yes, the proletariat is only revolutionary when it struggles to cease being the proletariat, that is, when it fights for its self-abolition. Of this there are certain symptoms and elements in some current struggles (e.g. struggles not for more work and more State but for another life, although they appear to be “suicidal” struggles) but still there’s a long way to go, because in their majority the proletarians continue to reproduce themselves as the class of labor and, therefore, as the class of Capital, and they continue to negotiate with the State about their demands in that reproduction. At the moment, then, the working class flows and ebbs between being an exploited class and being a revolutionary class. This is the fundamental contradiction, still unresolved, of the proletarian revolt today and, therefore, the principal reason for which it doesn’t transform into social revolution. </p>
<p> At the same time this happens because, in this era of real and total subsumption (integration and subordination) of work and life into Capital, Capital and the proletariat reciprocally imply each other — as the comrades of Endnotes say, — they mutually reproduce “24/7,” sometimes they identify with each other and other times they are in direct confrontation. A class relation in which, of course, the proletarian social pole is that which suffers all this human alienation as an exploited and oppressed class, and therefore once and awhile it rebels against such a condition. To which the Capital-State responds with repression and, above all, with co-opting and recuperation of the proletarian struggles into its logics, mechanisms, institutions, ideologies and discourses. Because if it doesn’t do so, it would seriously compromise its own existence. Like so then, from the point of view of the revolutionary and dialectical materialist, in the current historical cycle of class struggle the abolition of Capital necessarily implies the abolition of the proletariat and vice-versa. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Elisée Reclus – The So-Called Anarchist Decadence
Sun, 28 Mar 2021 03:57:59 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Elisée Reclus<br><strong>Title</strong>: The So-Called Anarchist Decadence<br><strong>Date</strong>: 20th of May 1904<br><strong>Notes</strong>: Original title, &quot;La Prétendu Décadence Anarchiste&quot;, translate in english by Anarchia!<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on the 24th of March 2021 from<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> A libertarian journalist from Paris recently uttered an anguished cry about the decadence in which anarchy has apparently already fallen into and in which it threatens to drown. Several of our comrades were troubled in their peace of mind at hearing that voice, which was very eloquent, and they asked with some anxiety those of their friends, that they believed more or less authorized because of their experience and their studies to form a personal opinion, perhaps a more optimistic one. </p>
<p> Having not read all of these answers, it would be difficult for me to make on judgement of the general feeling which emerged from the entirety of anarchist groups. Still, it seems to me that most comrades have not been shaken out of their good moods of confidence and determination: they’re not scared of the thought of being soon alone haggard and hungry on another raft of the Medusa <a class=”footnote” href=”#”>{1}</a>, lost in a seemingly endless ocean. I’ve even met friends who were moved by a joyful spirit, saying the current events were giving them hope. Since the time, still close, when the word &quot;anarchy&quot; in the sense of &quot;society without masters&quot;, forced itself into the official lexicons, it seems to them that the progress has been enormous, even if, strongly unequal in its appearences. If, by a sudden trick, it was possible to obtain the statistics of those who proclaim themselves &quot;anarchists&quot; consciously or unconsciously, the number would be a hundred times higher than what it was during the gatherings in Geneva, The Hague or Saint-Imier. <a class=”footnote” href=”#”>{2}</a></p>
<p> Recently, a diminution in appearence may have happened, but does it really matter, as so many individuals, who we would have rather not have to deal with, had obeyed to the prestige of the word, without a care for the the actual meaning that this word contained? We live in time in which it was fashionable, in the glamourous society, to call oneself an anarchist to frighten the bourgeois and make the dowager jump out of their velvet seats. Some took mysterious demeanors spreading dread and satanistic curiosity: the cranks were at the same time poets and bomb throwers, trying to make it known that they were working alongside nebulous fellows to create &quot;reversing cauldrons&quot; <a class=”footnote” href=”#”>{3}</a>. It was then the good times to move the ladies of a double thrill of admiration and terror, and to prepare one’s own future effects in the literary world, in theatres, at the salon, in the chambers leading to the Academy. Honnor Crosses, pensions, sub prefectures, and foreign missions have had reason of these new anarchists. Shouldn’t we be happy about it? The more we are getting rid of fake brothers, dodgy comrades, or companions who serve and betray us at the same time, the more we’ll be pleased to end up between ourselves, pursuing our ideas, realising our works. </p>
<p> This is a physiological law: after a certain period of ingestion, comes that of digestion, at least as important, and the only one that counts for the assimilation of nutriments. Man doesn’t seem as busy as during the meal, but it is now that his life is renewed. </p>
<p> How charming would it be, if the number of so called anarchists could diminish of all those who, in spite of their principles, are still dogmatic preachers and founders of parties! Vanity wins so easily over the best resolutions that many comrades hold forth talks on the most diverse subjects, without really knowing them, and try to group around them other comrades so as to make them their disciples. In that regard, many anarchists are far too similar to politicians. What can declarations of faith do to change characters and ways of life. And so each year, we have to deal with waste produced by polemists and journalists who will be brought back into standard life by their sheppards. </p>
<p> Remain the anarchists who are anarchists to the core, those who really think that every power, every law, distorts the master and the subject, and who, taking this as their starting point of their activity, only work as equals, using all their muscles and their will to overthrow the oppressors and uplift the humbles. </p>
<p> This is nothing easy, this is not a job made to rest, whatever say those busy with electoral work and deep in political interests. The life of the anarchist corresponds to his moral value entirely, because he gives everything that he has, for one in the struggle, and second in propaganda. The examples are endless of courageous comrades who have sacrificed everything, their well being, their family, their liberty. How many among our comrades can tell us the horrors of prison, of battalions sent to Africa, of penal colonies in Guyane? More importantly how many, of which the misery and the torture, in front of empty cribs, wasn’t as dramatic but was more striking. </p>
<p> And all that heroism is nothing but the natural scenery produced in contemporary society by the energy of certitudes. Where does it originates from, if it isn’t from the now clearer and clearer truth. Science progresses. Each day it reveals to us new facts, fruits of observation and experience and obtained through the personal initiative of researchers, which is of essentially anarchist nature. Each day, it teaches us to classify all these new knowledges following a logical order, independently of any routine, of Aristotelean tradition or any other, and this is again pure anarchy. Each day, the intellectual and moral world changes axis, taking as the regulator of its evolution, not only the wims of kings, the domga of priests, the repetition of schools, but the economic and social conditions of a milieu, better and better studied. Isn’t that too anarchy, even if hardly conscious of itself? </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Situationist International – Minimum Definition of Revolutionary Organizations
Sat, 27 Mar 2021 12:03:06 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Situationist International<br><strong>Title</strong>: Minimum Definition of Revolutionary Organizations<br><strong>Date</strong>: July 1966<br><strong>Notes</strong>: “Définition minimum des organisations révolutionnaires” was adopted by the 7th Conference of the SI (July 1966) and reproduced in <em>Internationale Situationniste</em> #11 (Paris, October 1967). This translation by Ken Knabb is from the Situationist International Anthology (Revised and Expanded Edition, 2006). No copyright.<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 2021-03-27 from<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> Since the only purpose of a revolutionary organization is the abolition of all existing classes in a way that does not bring about a new division of society, we consider an organization to be revolutionary if it <em>consistently and effectively</em> works toward the international realization of the absolute power of the workers councils, as prefigured in the experience of the proletarian revolutions of this century. </p>
<p> Such an organization makes an integral critique of the world, or is nothing. By integral critique we mean a comprehensive critique of all geographical areas where various forms of separate socioeconomic powers exist, as well as a comprehensive critique of all aspects of life. </p>
<p> Such an organization sees the beginning and end of its program in the complete decolonization of everyday life. It thus aims not at the masses’ self-management of the <em>existing</em> world, but at its uninterrupted transformation. It embodies the radical critique of <em>political economy,</em> the supersession of the commodity system and of wage labor. </p>
<p> Such an organization refuses to reproduce within itself any of the hierarchical conditions of the dominant world. The only limit to participating in its total democracy is that each member must have recognized and appropriated the <em>coherence of its critique</em>. This coherence must be both in the critical theory as such and in the relation between this theory and practical activity. The organization radically criticizes every <em>ideology</em> as <em>separate power</em> of ideas and as <em>ideas of separate power</em>. It is thus at the same time the negation of any remnants of religion, and of the prevailing social <em>spectacle</em> which, from news media to mass culture, monopolizes communication between people around their unilateral reception of images of their alienated activity. The organization dissolves any “revolutionary ideology,” unmasking it as a sign of the failure of the revolutionary project, as the private property of new specialists of power, as one more fraudulent <em>representation</em> setting itself above real proletarianized life. </p>
<p> Since the <em>ultimate criterion</em> of the modern revolutionary organization is its comprehensiveness, such an organization is ultimately a critique of politics. It must explicitly aim to dissolve itself as a separate organization at its moment of victory. </p>
<div class=”right”>
<p> July 1966 </p>
<div class=”amw-teaser-no-ellipsis”></div>

Errico Malatesta – The Irreconcilable Contradiction
Sat, 27 Mar 2021 04:58:05 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Errico Malatesta<br><strong>Title</strong>: The Irreconcilable Contradiction<br><strong>Date</strong>: March 31, 1900<br><strong>Notes</strong>: <em>Translated from “La contradizione irreduttibile,” La Questione Sociale (Paterson, New Jersey) 6, new series, no. 30 (March 31, 1900)</em><br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> They write from Bari, Italy: </p>
<p><em>Our city is going through a very sad crisis. Barrel-making, once a thriving industry, is increasingly on the decline. The cause of this decline lies in the introduction of new fares by railroad and shipping companies, which allow for the return of empty casks at very low cost; therefrom comes a decreased consumption of barrels. Some time ago the barrel-making masters took steps to resolve this critical condition by asking that the transportation costs of empty casks be increased. Last Sunday, in front of the prefecture, they met to ask the authorities for help. A committee of 12 barrel-making workers, accompanied by a public safety inspector, was received by the prefect, who promised to sort things out.</em></p>
<br />
<p> How on earth will the prefect sort things out? </p>
<p> By ordering the railroad companies to increase again the transportation costs for empty casks? How so, if the capitalists are the ones who own the railroads, the ones who command the prefects and the prefects’ masters! </p>
<p> And then, increasing the charge for returning barrels would drive up the price of wine. </p>
<p> If the wine consumers were to turn to the prefect, would he promise to sort things out for them too? </p>
<p> That poor prefect must find himself in a similar position as Almighty God, to whom one person asks for rain and another for good weather. And he is not even omnipotent! </p>
<p> But in vain do we worry about the position of prefects, who know quite well how to dig themselves out of this puzzle… by making promises to everybody and keeping none of them. </p>
<p> Much more deserving of our commiseration are those poor workers who, ignorant of the root causes of their problems, let themselves be deceived and mocked to the extent that they let themselves be escorted to the prefecture by a public safety inspector, and hope that the officials will care about their fate. </p>
<p> The case of the barrel-makers of Bari is a typical case, which clearly shows the absurdity of capitalist society. </p>
<p> In similar cases there is no possible cure other than the abolition of capitalism, the radical transformation of the system of production. And every trade, every form of human activity must, sooner or later, find itself in the same case, which is already rather widespread due to the overabundance of labor. </p>
<p> Associations are of no help; nor are strikes and all other forms of resistance; nor cooperatives. </p>
<p> Whenever no one needs the labor of a worker, the worker cannot impose any agreement: he must die of hunger—more or less slowly, more or less convulsively, but die of hunger he must… unless he can break free from the current system. </p>
<p> And progress tends to make the labor of an ever-increasing number of workers unnecessary. </p>
<p> This is the ultimate, irreconcilable contradiction between capitalism and progress. </p>
<p> Either prevent all progress, enshrining the current castes, abolishing competition between capitalists, prohibiting any production development, any new machine, any new scientific application, and reducing workers to the status of domestic animals granted rations by their masters—in short, a regime like the one the Jesuits exercised in Paraguay;294or destroy capitalism and organize production not for the profit of a few, but for the greatest well-being for all. </p>
<p> The request of the Bari barrel-makers to increase the transportation cost of used casks, so that the wineries would find it more convenient to burn them rather than send them back, is the same as asking the barrel-makers to only send 10 out of every 100 barrels to the market and destroy the other 90 before they can be used. </p>
<p> Is it possible to achieve that? Of course not. Yet, the current structure of society is so absurd that it would make such a measure beneficial. </p>
<p> When people die of hunger because there is too much stuff, or because it is too easy to produce it, or because it is too durable, destruction might appear—and might fleetingly be—more useful than production. A fire, an earthquake might be a blessing, bringing work and bread to the unemployed. </p>
<p> But destruction of wealth is not how workers can emancipate themselves. And luckily the time has passed, at least in the more advanced countries, during which workers thought they could stop progress, and put as much energy into smashing up machinery as it would have required to take control of it. </p>
<p> We must not fight progress, but direct it to everyone’s benefit. </p>
<p> And for that to happen workers must take possession of all the capital, all social wealth, so that it would then be in their interest that products abound and production require the least possible effort. </p>
<p> This is why it is necessary to make the revolution. </p>
<p> Labor organizing, strikes, resistance of all kinds can at a certain point in capitalist evolution improve the conditions of workers or prevent them from worsening; they can serve very well to train workers for the struggle; they are always, in capable hands, a means of propaganda;—but they are hopelessly powerless to resolve the social question. And thus they must be used in such a way as to help prepare minds and muscle for the revolution—for expropriation. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Peter Gelderloos – Is There a Doctor in the House?
Sat, 27 Mar 2021 04:58:05 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Peter Gelderloos<br><strong>Title</strong>: Is There a Doctor in the House?<br><strong>Date</strong>: Winter 2020<br><strong>Source</strong>: Dope issue 12 –<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> Anarchists are against hierarchy – but what does that actually mean? </p>
<p> Pop philosophers and liberal commentators think they’ve scored an easy goal when they pull off a little number like this: “Anarchists don’t live in the real world. They wouldn’t let their neighbour perform brain surgery on them, so they recognise expertise, but expertise is hierarchy.” Anarchists have actually been studying and analysing hierarchy for more than a century, so it shouldn’t be a surprise that we’ve answered this exact question many, many times. </p>
<p> The confusion is little more than a word play, conflating the definitions of three very different terms: rank, expertise, and hierarchy. Aside from populists who pretend that all forms of power are the same so they can continue to justify the very worst, most oppressive uses of power, the waters have also been muddied by psychologists with an individualist bias or animal behaviouralists who created overly simplified schema for social groups by studying animals in captivity. They were drawn to the term hierarchy, even though (or perhaps because?) that term was originally applied to human society and was being developed by anarchists to distinguish between just and unjust forms of social organisation. </p>
<p> That meanings change over time and across contexts is a fundamental fact of language, but the effect of those changes is far from neutral. There are changes that destroy meaning, that make it easier to manipulate people and harder to speak with clarity. And, for whatever reason, English is particularly vulnerable to such changes – perhaps because it’s the language the advertising industry was invented in, or its abundance of both homonyms and synonyms, or the prevalence of puritanism in the culture. </p>
<p> Whatever the case, we can assert that the aforementioned uses of hierarchy are incorrect, not just because of the term’s original meaning but because those uses make it impossible to analyse oppression and coercion in human societies, which in many cases is the very reason centrists have tried to steal the term from anti-authoritarian theorisations. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Ranking</div>
<p> Ranking is simply a comparative, linear ordering of elements. This could range from someone having favourites, to an athletic competition, to rating people’s skill in a specific activity. This football team is better than that one, she has the best aim, I like grits better than Cap’n Crunch. The criteria are infinite: there are millions of skills or preferences to compare, and millions of ways to compare them. In the absence of a social hierarchy, ranking does not confer you power over anyone else. Having a high rank can give you status, which can certainly play a role in true hierarchies, but it is not in and of itself a hierarchy. Being #1 at something doesn’t necessarily give you an advantage elsewhere. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Expertise</div>
<p> Expertise is the social recognition of knowledge and capacity. That recognition can be informal – you ask your neighbour to help fix your car because everyone knows she is a great mechanic – or it can be formal, as in the licensing of doctors. When it’s formal, that means a group of experts has organised themselves to confer recognition and perhaps also decide who can practice the profession. This recognises that knowledge is collective and expertise takes a great deal of effort. People are in fact not all equal and in some cases being better or more experienced at something gives you more legitimacy to do that thing, like fly an airplane or mediate a serious conflict. Questions of oppression come into the mix when people are denied access to the education they need to become experts in their chosen field, or when someone’s experience or ability is not recognised because they come from a marginalised group. Again, both of these forms of exclusion require the existence of a social hierarchy, and are not innate properties of expertise itself. </p>
<p> Anarchists won’t have any trouble imagining a society in which professional groups organise their own training, guaranteeing free access and assurances of quality and safety. If you’re going to get surgery, you want to make sure the person performing it is good enough or, if they’ve been dangerously negligent in the past, they won’t be able to do so again. A formal institution that gets to decide who is chosen for training, especially if they have a monopoly in their field, certainly has an authoritarian potential that anarchists would want to watch out for, but there are plenty of ways to organise such institutions to prevent that authoritarianism from manifesting. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Hierarchy</div>
<p> The original meaning of hierarchy is “rule by priests.” It is a social order in which a closed organisation with internal ranking decides who can join and how they must ascend the institutional ladder. The higher up, the more power they have, over both initiates and the masses of people outside the organisation. In other words, a hierarchy allows a small elite to control an organisation as well as the values of broader society, getting everyone (inside and outside the organisation) to participate in their domination. Even the elite are not completely free. Though they have the most agency, they still must uphold the logic of the institution that produces the power they wield, and that power tends to accumulate over time, meaning the organisation’s traditions may be stronger than its individual members. In the end, members of a hierarchy are only free to increase the hierarchy’s power, with disputes over how best to do that resolved through the relationship of how much power the hierarchy can mobilise and how much power specific members of the hierarchy can utilise for their own ends against their opponents. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Emma Goldman – The Political Soviet Grinding Machine
Fri, 26 Mar 2021 21:12:36 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Emma Goldman<br><strong>Title</strong>: The Political Soviet Grinding Machine<br><strong>Date</strong>: December 9, 1936<br><strong>Notes</strong>: [Typed article with handwritten corrections from Folder 18, G.P. Maksimov (Maximoff) papers, International Institute for Social History, Amsterdam. This is an unused appendix for <em>The Guillotine at Work</em> and previously unpublished.]<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 26<sup>th</sup> March 2021 from <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=”″></a><br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> Fifteen years have passed since comrade A Chapiro [Schapiro], my old pal Alexander Berkman, now gone from me, and myself came out of Soviet Russia to give to the thinking world the disclosures of the political grinding machine we found there. It was only after a long conflict that we decided to do so. For well we knew the price we will have to pay for speaking openly about the terrible political persecutions that was a daily affair in the so called Socialist Republic. The price we paid for our determination was high enough, but was nothing compared to the avalanche of abuse and vilification hurled against me, when my first ten articles about Soviet Russia appeared in the public press. Since I foresaw as much, I was not very shocked over the fact that my own comrades misunderstood what I had to say and the motive which induced me to appear in the NEW YORK WORLD. Much less did I care for the poison that oozed out against me from the Communists in Russia, America, and other countries. </p>
<p> Even while yet in Russia we protested against the grinding mill as we saw it in its sinister force. For myself I can say, and I can say the same for my comrade Alexander Berkman, we lost no opportunity to go from Bolshevist leader to leader; to plead for the unfortunate victims of the Cheka. Invariably we were told “wait till all our fronts are liquidated and you will see that the greatest political freedom will be established in Soviet Russia.” This assurance was repeated time on end so convincingly that we began to wonder whether we had understood the effect of Revolution on the rights of the individual as far as political opinion was concerned. We decided to wait. But weeks and months passed and there was no letup in the relentless extermination of all people who dared disagree even in the least with the methods of the Communist State. It was only after the massacre of Kronstadt, that we, our comrades Alexander Berkman and Alexander Chapiro [Schapiro] felt that we had no right to wait any longer, that it became imperative for us old revolutionists to cry the truth from the very housetops. Nevertheless we waited until the fronts were liquidated, though it was bitter hard to keep silent after 400 politicals were forcibly removed from the Boutirka prison and sent to remote places. When Fanny Baron and Tcherny [Lev Cherny] were murdered. At last the holy day arrived, the fronts were liquidated But the political grinding mill ground on, thousands being crushed by its wheels. </p>
<p> It was then that we came to the conclusion that the Soviet promise reiterated to us again and again, was like all promises coming from the Kremlin — an empty shell. We therefore came to the conclusion that we owed it to our suffering comrades, to all revolutionary political victims as well as to the workers and peasants of Russia, to go abroad and place our findings before the world. From that time on and until 1930, comrade Berkman worked incessantly for the political prisoners and on raising funds to keep them alive in their dreadful living tomb. After that, comrade [Rudolf] Rocker, [Senya] Fleschin, Mollie Alperine [Steimer], Dobinski [Jacques Doubinsky] and many other faithful comrades kept up the work which our beloved Alexander was forced to discontinue. I can say that until this day the devoted efforts to bring our hapless comrades in Soviet Russia some cheer and a few comforts have never ceased, which merely goes to prove what devotion, love and solidarity can do. </p>
<p> In justice to the heads of the Soviet Government be it said that there was still a semblance of fair play while Lenin was alive. True, it was he who issued the slogan that Anarcho-syndicalists and Anarchists are but like the petit bourgeoisie, and that they should be exterminated. Nevertheless it is true that his political victims were sentenced for a definite period and were left with the hope that they would be set free when their sentence expired. Since the advent of Stalin, that bit of hope, hope so essential to people in prison for an idea, and so necessary for the continuation of their morale has been abolished. </p>
<p> Stalin, true to the meaning of his name, could not bear to think, that people given 5 or ten years, should be left with the expectation that they would one day see freedom again. Under his iron rule, people whose sentence expires are re-sentenced and shipped to another concentration camp. Thus we have today numerous comrades who have been shoved from exile to exile since 15 years. And there is no end in sight. But why should we be surprised at the relentless grinding mill Stalin has inaugurated for such opponents as Anarchists and Social Revolutionists? Stalin has proven that he is as cruel with his former comrades as with the rest who dare doubt his wisdom. The latest purge, quite equal to the purge of Hitler ([handwritten addition in margin] and the latest victim arrested and perhaps exiled, Zensl Muehsam) should prove to all who are still capable of thinking, that Stalin is determined to exterminate everybody who has looked into his cards. We need not hope, therefore, that our Anarchist comrades or any of the Left wing Revolutionaries will be spared. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

M.D.C – Establishing an immanent counterhumanism for the un-foreclosure of the future
Fri, 26 Mar 2021 14:04:31 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: M.D.C<br><strong>Title</strong>: Establishing an immanent counterhumanism for the un-foreclosure of the future<br><strong>Subtitle</strong>: Deleuze, Mbembe, Hartman and the anarchic Open World<br><strong>Date</strong>: 2020<br><strong>Source</strong>: Source files shared with library via author<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Introduction</div>
<p> This essay addresses the political form of the human, its multiply-stratified nature, and the world it makes up – by focusing first on a tension between two broad kinds of approaches in philosophy of race that intend to unmake that stratification. The political form of the human as understood here is fundamentally tied to all aspects of human relations, and as such when changed will come with a corresponding fundamental change in our political arrangements. Given that, this essay addresses those arrangements and the ways they might be brought about as an inherent part of this question, including a central question of identity politics; how we might use the categories we wish to destroy in order to move beyond them. </p>
<p> The starting point for this essay is to draw first from pre-existing paradigms to demonstrate and flesh out a major conflict between two kinds of theoretical movement that are not just found in race philosophy, but in my experience is most pronounced there. Both movements deal with the problem of the human; specifically, how the present universalised image of the human that has come to be deeply built into the material and conceptual structures of global society advantages those with a specific set of characteristics in various ways. One view, which following Sylvia Wynter I called <em>counterhumanism</em>, takes on the Césairean challenge to create a new humanism “made to the measure of the world”; that is, inclusive of all humans (Césaire, 1955, p. 73). The other view, following some Deleuzo-Guattarian scholarship, I will call <em>nonhumanism</em>, is based on a creative nonnormative philosophy and understands the very category of the human to be harmful, as a universalised and transcendent norm. The former view holds that we should replace the current human with another all-inclusive one, whereas the latter view holds that any possible conception of the human is problematic in the way that it limits our possibilities and conserves harmful values, claiming that it is desirable to go beyond any such human. </p>
<p> I will outline more fully what I mean by “nonnormative” in the sections on Deleuze in Part I, but for now since it is the fundamental point of critique that divides the two major positions I am considering, it is worthwhile to outline what is meant. Deleuze’s nonnormative project is a project against <em>transcendence</em>;<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[1]</a> value frameworks grounded in abstract universals. They are transcendent in the sense that they are “outside,” rather than immanent to the context in which they are. We can understand the nonnormative project as a set of philosophical tools against transcendence, and ‘immanence’ the positive form of that project. </p>
<p> Counterhumanism, as will be exemplified in Sylvia Wynter’s approach, seeks to ground humanness in an abstract universal; to create a complete, alternate, model of humanness – it is as such a normative approach. The nonhumanist approach has three kinds of claims constitutive of a nonnormative approach: It is sceptical that any model can ever be adequate to the complexity of reality, demonstrates that what we understand to be humanness today is simply the result of contingent historical processes which have since the beginning been harmful, and claims that one result of this models-based approach is that there is a tendency to police all that which does not fit within the model. </p>
<p> Part I is divided into two. The first half introduces counterhumanism; two of its foundational historical proponents, Aimé Césaire and Frantz Fanon, before arriving at that of Sylvia Wynter, developing a schema of the kinds of claims that they make, and its uses. Though each to differing degrees have critiques of transcendent frameworks, they are not grounded in pure immanence and, in the case of Wynter, overtly accept transcendent grounds. The second half introduces nonhumanism; delving into a Deleuzian nonnormative approach through his unique Spinozian-Nietzschean philosophy of difference, applying nonnormativity to the idea of the human generally and also in the specific ways that Deleuze and Guattari do through the concept of <em>faciality</em>, and introducing positive elements of their critique of transcendent normativity. Sylvia Wynter’s approach and the Deleuzian approach conceptualise the relationship between the dominant form of the human and what is dominated in similar ways – where Wynter says that the dominant form, Man, overrepresents itself over the complete space of the human, and Deleuzians will say that the dominant form, the face, overcodes itself over the complete space of the world, and both understand their task to be the unmaking of those relationships that co-constitute with the dominant form to come with a concomitant radical change in our political arrangements and how we all relate to one another. Despite these similarities, we will find the counter- and nonhumanist solutions to be incompatible – divided along the lines of whether transcendence is acceptable. </p>
<p> Part II is my engagement with Achille Mbembe’s recent book, <em>Critique of Black Reason</em> (2017), and also has two sections. The first gives an introduction to the book and discusses a central element of critique within the book; that of resentment. The second engages Mbembe’s positive critique on multiple levels. I will set out to establish some of the relevant and central movements of the book while highlighting both the counter- and nonhumanist elements that sustain it, in order to set up his work as a space demonstrating the way that he resolves the conflict between both. My claim is that his work resolves this problem by reframing humanness in terms of a nonnormative geographical relationship, which allows for us to reconceptualise counterhumanism, maintaining its use, language, and spirit, while also upholding the nonhumanist immanent critique of transcendence. Mbembe, in conceptualising race in terms of enclosures and political-geographical relationships that span the world, provides a clear framework from which we can seek to overcome the stratified nature of the human, as well as an approach to identity politics that does not reify the categories that we wish to destroy, that sets conditions for us to make the world <em>a world,</em> what he calls the ‘Open World’, a world politically unstratified along lines such as race, class, and gender. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Lorenzo Kom’boa Ervin – Manifesto to the International Anarchist Movement
Fri, 26 Mar 2021 13:13:55 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Lorenzo Kom’boa Ervin<br><strong>Title</strong>: Manifesto to the International Anarchist Movement<br><strong>Subtitle</strong>: A Call for an International Revolutionary Resistance Movement<br><strong>Date</strong>: 1979<br><strong>Notes</strong>: Published by Monkeywrench Press and The Worker Self-Education Foundation of the Industrial Workers of the World Philadelphia. This version copied from the 1995 edition.<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 2021-03-26 from<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Foreword to the Second Edition</div>
<p> When I first wrote this pamphlet in 1979, Communism was still going strong in the Soviet Union and its satellite countries. However, with the collapse of communism during the late 1980s (and also into the 90s) in East Europe and other parts of the so-called “socialist” world, leading to the partial discredit of Marxism-Leninism, this is a time for new revolutionary ideas and startling social change. </p>
<p> Anarchism and its known variants: Anarcho-Syndicalism, Council Communism, Libertarian Socialism, Situationism and the so-called Autonomist movement, and new forms not yet seen will arise and become immensely popular, in many respects, this process of political or ideological fertilization has already begun. These movements are class struggle-oriented and in favor of social revolution, instead of counter-cultural tendencies or classical Anarchist formations which existed in the 1970s, when I came to the North American Anarchist movement. </p>
<p> Because of this desire for new theory and tactics, Anarchist ideals will be evident in rank-and-file labor movements, neighborhood and community organizing, cooperatives, anti-racist organizing, feminism, and on the larger international stage. The 1990s and the next century will find the Anarchist and Libertarian Socialist ideas coming into vogue in a big way. </p>
<p> The bureaucratic Bolshevik revolution, which triumphed in Russia in 1917 and had dominated the world Socialist movement for almost 75 years, is no more. The Bolsheviks who crushed Anarchism in Russia and the Ukraine, destroyed the soviets, and erected a bloody, party/state dictatorship, have betrayed true revolutionary ideals. Did the workers rush to defend the Soviet state or communist bureaucracy in 1991? NO! Are they doing it now? NO! In fact, they wished it a quick exit onto the ash heap of history. Even though Gorbachev and Yeltsin have established a state Capitalist federation in its place, and they promise the workers more prosperity and freedom, it is a lie that Capitalism has always told its workers. And a lie is still a lie. </p>
<p> The new state federation cannot possibly last, in fact, my prediction is that civil war and a new social revolution are coming soon in Russia and to the breakaway republics of what used to known as the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. You can rest assured that Capitalism will not last for long in Russia and in the rest of the former East Bloc. The people in those countries will not tolerate it, they want bread and freedom, not starvation and war. Up to this point they have had no alternative offered to them but the corrupt capitalist market system. </p>
<p> But, in fact, Capitalism itself is so crisis-ridden that it is on the verge of collapse; it is now in the deepest worldwide economic depression since the 1930s. It cannot provide any help to those countries. </p>
<p> We must prepare the ground for revolutionary struggle. When I first decided to write the Manifesto to the International Anarchist movement in the 1970s, even during my stay in prison, I knew the day would come when Anarchism as a social revolutionary force could take its place on the world stage as the major revolutionary political philosophy. That day is now here! </p>
<p> So I have revised the pamphlets I wrote back then, and hope to make them available to a wider audience and to a new generation of Anarchist organizers. </p>
<p> Not since the past century has Anarchism’s future shown so brightly. So now let us get to work building the social revolution for the next century. We need to build an Anarchist International to work with other Libertarian revolutionaries throughout the world. </p>
<p> Since the time I wrote these pamphlets in 1970, I have changed my mind about many tactical, strategical and philosophical things about Anarchism, but one thing I have never changed my mind about is the necessity for social revolution. But we must work at it, it won’t happen by itself, believe me. We must do the hard work of organizing and propagating our views to workers, peasants, farmers and in neighborhoods, and other social units all over the world. We’ must fight for the Anarchist way of life, it will not be given to us. Freedom is not just another word for inaction. So let’s get busy! </p>
<div class=”right”>
<p> Lorenzo Kom’boa Ervin </p>
<p> Chattanooga, Tennessee </p>
<p> October 1993. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Manifesto to the International Anarchist Movement</div>
<p><em>“Before the First World War the main impetus for Social Revolution came from the Anarchist and revolutionary Syndicalist movements. However, following the defeat of the Russian Revolution with the triumph of authoritarian (State) Communism, world Capitalism tended to concentrate its energies on destroying this real apparent danger to its continued existence, thus giving the impression that the Libertarian movement and its ideas were superfluous, or, at best, a side issue to the main struggle, so far as the organized working class was concerned. Only in a minority of countries did Anarchism take the lead, while elsewhere the very idea of freedom went into decline. The modern States, totalitarian or democratic, private and State capitalism, all variations of political and religious ideologies, trade unionism (whether reformist or State-run), in general, all social groups which are part of the productive society have established, as a fact, a coexistence that tends at any cost, to ensure the present status quo for alt forms of privilege, exploitation, and authority</em>.” </p>
<div class=”right”>
<p> Albert Meltzer, </p>
<p><em>The International Revolutionary Solidarity Movement,</em></p>
<p> Cienfuegos Press 1974. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Lorenzo Kom’boa Ervin – A Draft Proposal for the Founding of the International Working Peoples Association
Fri, 26 Mar 2021 13:01:43 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Lorenzo Kom’boa Ervin<br><strong>Title</strong>: A Draft Proposal for the Founding of the International Working Peoples Association<br><strong>Date</strong>: 1979<br><strong>Notes</strong>: Lorenzo Komboa Ervin, <em>A Draft Proposal for the Founding of the International Working Peoples Association</em> (Pages from Prison Number One), (New York: Horse and Goat People, 1979). Reprinted in Eric Ferrara, editor, <em>Revolt: East Village Activism Literature, 1960s-1990s</em> (New York: Lower East Side History Project , 2018), 119–134. Transcription by Jessica Newby.<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 2021-03-26 from<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>History of the IWPA</div>
<p> The International Working Peoples Association was first founded by the German Anarchist, Johann Most, in 1883. Among its membership and two of its most active militants were August Spies and Albert Parsons, later hanged in the notorious legal lynching known as the Haymarket case. It was the IWPA which led the fight for the 8-hour work day, and against any employer discrimination towards women, Black, or foreign-born workers. It was a revolutionary labor organization which stood for the overthrow of Capitalism and reconstruction of society on the basis of Workers’ self-management. The Libertarian Socialist movement in America at this time was split into various sections with diverse ideas on Anarchism. It was therefore, Most’s foremost aim to bring them together under the wings of the IWPA, as well as to organize the workers. In 1883, a convention was held in October at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. It was this meeting which issued the new historical Pittsburgh Proclamation with its declaration of the following six principal points: </p>
<p> “By force our ancestors liberated themselves from political oppression, by force their children will have to liberate themselves from economic bondage. It is therefore your right, it is your duty to arm: What we would achieve is therefore plainly and simply: </p>
<p> First: — Destruction of the existing class rule, by all means. i.e., by energetic, relentless, revolutionary and international action. </p>
<p> Second: — Establishment of a free society based upon cooperative organization of production. </p>
<p> Third: — Free exchange of equivalent products by and between the productive organizations without commerce and profit-mongery. </p>
<p> Fourth: — Organization of education on a secular scientific and equal basis for both sexes. </p>
<p> Fifth: — Equal rights for all without distinction to sex or race. </p>
<p> Sixth: — Regulation of all public affairs by free contracts between the autonomous (independent) communes and associations, resting on a federalistic basis. </p>
<div class=”right”>
<p> Signed: October 16, 1883 </p>
<p> The International Congress of Socialists” </p>
<p> The IWPA became the most militant Labor organization in America, especially when the Knights of Labor more and more began to sink into the swamp of reformism and class collaborationism, (even to the extent of the leaders of the Knights praising the execution of Parsons, Spies, and the other Haymarker frame-up victims). The organization had a short, but sweet life; it was crushed in 1888 with the Haymarket judicial murders and other State repression. Such Labor militancy was not again seen until the founding of the Industrial Workers of the World in 1905. We owe it to the memory of our martyred comrades, and for ourselves in this day and age to re-establish the organization. We must once again make Anarchism a working class doctrine. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Why Do We Need an IWPA Today?</div>
<p> We need the IWPA today because the same social and economic conditions exist today as did in 1883, when the organization was founded. Blacks, women and foreign-born workers (now called “illegal aliens”) are still the most oppressed workers, and there is still the same contradiction between capital and Labor, demanding class struggle. This is not to say that nothing significant has happened in the labor movement since 1888 when the IWPA was crushed: the 8 hour day has been won; the Labor battles of the IWW to organize the working class in One Big Union; the CIO organizing drives of the 1930s; and so much more, until now over 20 million workers, one-third of the American workforce, are organized into unions. And there lies a large part of the problem, for the unions (with few exceptions) have lost their fighting spirit and are now mere “business unions,” pimps of the workers’ labor power, and at best serve as minimal protection against the employer’s assaults. The working class needs a return to the revolutionary labor movement which existed in the last part of the 1880s–90s and the early part of this century. The working class needs the International Working Peoples Association, with a program for today’s worker. We must organize the most oppressed workers, but it is also our responsibility to organize the entire working class, or more precisely, serve as a vehicle for their liberation, since only the workers can emancipate themselves. </p>
<p> Racism and sexism are the major obstacles to a united working class. We say that this must be overcome before Capitalism can be successfully overcome. Racism and sexism must be fought vigorously wherever they are found, even if in our own ranks, and even in one’s own breast. The traditional labor movement has used the workers to ensure the success of their organizing drives and to fill union coffers, and have then betrayed and discarded them. They are seeking an alternative; the IWPA must be that alternative and fight for their rights. </p>
<p> Union militants have formed rank-and-file caucuses in practically all of their major unions, and some whole union locals are militant hotbeds of rank and file agitation; they are seeking an alternative to the undemocratic, class collaborationist policy of the business unions; the IWPA must provide such an alternative and must link up with such rank and file caucuses. In addition, the IWPA must concentrate on organizing un-organized (non-union, foreign-born and unemployed) workers. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Antonio Vidal Arabi – On the attempt to raise rebellion in the Spanish zone of Morocco in September 1938 and the ramifications thereof
Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:07:09 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Antonio Vidal Arabi<br><strong>Title</strong>: On the attempt to raise rebellion in the Spanish zone of Morocco in September 1938 and the ramifications thereof<br><strong>Date</strong>: August 20, 1938<br><strong>Notes</strong>: <em>From FAI’s Peninsular Committee Report to a Plenum of Regionals on the Direction of the War and Changes Commended by Experience (20/08/1938).</em> Translated by Paul Sharkey<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 25<sup>th</sup> March 2021 from <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a><br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> In the putting together of this report, I have had, for the most part, to delve into my memories for the required details, since most of my archive, which is to say, most of the copies of my entire correspondence, coded orders and the like, traded with my superiors ever since I joined the foreign intelligence [service] of the High Command of the Land Forces of the Spanish Republic, was left by me in the care of my superior, Señor Aransay, with an undertaking that I could later have it back. Once said documentation had been handed over, he spirited it away, with the best of intentions I imagine, despite his undertaking. There was some talk, I think, about its being sent on to Barcelona. Since I was nothing I could do, being under arrest and given how the war finished, I think that gentleman’s actions may have been for the best as they pre-empted the potential for greater damage being done. That being the case, my memory might just let me down on some of the earlier dates, but everything that I am about to set out will be wholly truthful and, now that the war is over, there is no reason for me to leave out anything ever left unmentioned in my communications with my superiors on account of the war and any moral inhibition on my part. </p>
<p> In order to set the context for the events I am about to recount, I shall hark back in time a little, albeit briefly, so as to explain the roots of my activities in Morocco by way of background. </p>
<p> The army revolt [July 1936] caught me in Santa Cruz de Tenerife where I was living; at the time I held a post on the Defence Committee of the Confederal Organisation, the latter being the only force in Tenerife with any prospect of organising resistance at the time. For reasons we need not go into here, things did not go as we would have wished and the view was that we needed to spell out our situation to the government along with the chances of our succeeding against the rebels right across the province. At a meeting it was agreed that a delegate should set out immediately for Madrid and I was the one selected, with another comrade to accompany me. </p>
<p> Surmounting all of the difficulties, I reached Barcelona (with my companion staying behind in Oran for a time) twenty days after setting off from Santa Cruz. </p>
<p> To kill time, on arrival in Barcelona I reported to my Organisation and in confidence told the secretary of my desire to be introduced to the government’s representative and for the radio to report my arrival in the peninsula that very night (using a pre-arranged formula of words) so that my comrades in the islands might know that I had achieved my first target. The report was broadcast and I was afforded “fast track” access to speak to the Secretary for War, who was at that point (mid-October) Juan Garcia Oliver, who went on later to serve as Minister of Justice. </p>
<p> I reckon he took me for a crackpot (something which has often befallen me in dealings with various persons during the war, something I put down to the lack of geographical knowledge on the part of many of them). And he gave me to understand that I was wasting his time and wasting my own time too. </p>
<p> I approached the Regional [Committee] for assistance in getting to Madrid and was issued with a train ticket out of state funds, plus 25 pesetas in cash (I had just arrived in the peninsula in a lamentable physical condition and semi-clothed). </p>
<p> It took me two days to get to Madrid. Countrymen of mine had raised a Battalion and there I came across some old friends. I immediately had a word with the islands’ representatives in the Cortes – Junco and Toral from Gran Canaria, and Castro Diaz and Sosa Acevedo from Tenerife. </p>
<p><em>Aplatanamiento</em>, as we call laziness over there, or lack of vision was either a factor or maybe it was because I wore myself out dropping into government offices, meeting no one who could understand my point, one of the factors most crucial to our success. (The Canaries supplied the enemy with 50,000 fighting men, and virtually all the fuel needs of his army, plus tobacco and fruit galore. And facilitated access to Ifni, the possessions in the Sahara and in the Gulf of Guinea, from where he was receiving large stocks of various materials). </p>
<p> I decided to turn to the CNT National Committee which was then based in Madrid and to its secretary Horacio Prieto. He had no need to tell me where he was born, for I could tell that he was born a long, long way from the sea. </p>
<p> A Canaries Antifascist Committee was immediately set up and it agreed to seek direct intelligence from the comrades left behind in the islands and to funnel financial help to them so that they could resist whilst lobbying continued at the highest levels. This new mission was entrusted to me and I left the country. </p>
<p> Having gathered that intelligence, I returned to Madrid in late November. The deputies had other irons in the fire and did not feel that the time was right for broaching the matter with the government. </p>
<p> With the prime reason for my having come to the peninsula having met with failure, I made my way back to Catalonia and enlisted as a militia with the Sur-Ebro Column (later the 25 th Division). A few weeks later, I was summoned by the Canaries Committee to Valencia, to where it had relocated and was once more commissioned to gather intelligence in the islands with an eye to mounting a venture with material backing from the Navy Minister. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

ziq – Against Community Building, Towards Friendship
Wed, 24 Mar 2021 13:08:41 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: ziq<br><strong>Title</strong>: Against Community Building, Towards Friendship<br><strong>Date</strong>: 23 March 2021<br><strong>Source</strong>:<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>The Dangerous Failings of Community</div>
<p> As long as I’ve been around other anarchists, I’ve witnessed an unremitting reverence for the sanctity of community. </p>
<p> The idea of community is held in such high regard by anarchists that it’s eerily reminiscent of USA liberals paying fealty to the &quot;sacred ground&quot; of their nation’s capitol. Community is something consecrated and unassailable to anarchists. It’s the bond that binds us to our fellow true believers. It gives us belonging, direction, purpose, safety, all those good things. </p>
<p> But does it really? </p>
<p> The more time I spend amongst anarchists, the more I find the &quot;anarchist community&quot; ideal to be inherently unattainable and isolating. It seems every attempt at building an organized egalitarian community ends up enabling gross misconduct by certain members and the end result is always demoralizing burn-out for everyone involved. </p>
<p> The attempt to group disparate strangers who barely get along, based on an imagined affinity (typically ideology, but painted in such broad strokes so as to be rendered inconsequential) inevitably manages to crash and burn every time. </p>
<p> A gentle, alienated soul’s deep pining to build community will often get exploited by abusive people so they can insert themselves into their target’s life. By attaching themselves to a community, virtually anyone can gain instant access to the minds and hearts of people that would never have associated with them otherwise. Anarchists are so dedicated to maintaining the ideals of egalitarianism, openness, inclusivity, mutuality and fraternity, that they’ll put up with a whole lot of shit from people that demonstrate over and over again that they don’t share the same values as them. Abusive people are tolerated and even accepted by us so long as they identify as belonging to the anarchist movement, because of course anarchists aren’t fond of gatekeeping or erecting barriers to entry. </p>
<p> When a person announces they’re a member of the anarchist community, we immediately hand them a black cat badge to pin to their shirt (usually metaphorically, sometimes literally) and welcome them with open arms, no questions asked. Predictably, parasitic abusers are able to swagger into our spaces flashing that official membership badge, and they get to work preying on vulnerable, empathetic people who are looking for fellow travelers who share their ideals. </p>
<p> Again and again I’ve witnessed these entitled parasites take advantage of the compassionate anarchist spirit and they’ll often spend years tearing people’s lives apart until the community becomes so toxic and unbearable that everyone abandons ship to try and preserve their mental health and physical safety. In the end, everyone seems to end up more exploited and traumatized by the anarchist community experience than they would have been without it. </p>
<p> Due to my experiences both managing and participating in various anarchist spaces, I’d really like to throw out the entire idea of anarchist community and re-imagine how anarchistic interactions can be manifested going forward. </p>
<p> Much like the related ideologically sacred institution of democracy, the whole concept of community is insidious and underhanded, an ideal seemingly designed to manipulate people into associating with bullies and dickheads by whittling away at basic human needs like autonomy, self-determination and consent. </p>
<p> Too many times, our dedication to building unfettered communities open to all people lowers our guard and lets cops, rapists and assorted authoritarians infiltrate our movements and inflict lasting damage to both our collective and individual psyches. </p>
<p> A community in its current form almost requires everyone involved be socialized in extreme docility, forced to exist in a perpetual state of submission to everyone around them. Otherwise, the community would almost certainly implode. </p>
<p> Without that docile meekness being forced on all the community members, the billions of people living boxed up and piled on top of neighbors they’re barely able to tolerate would inevitably sharpen their fangs and rip each other apart to reclaim the personal space every living being needs in order to exercise their autonomy and individuality. </p>
<p> If our sharp claws weren’t meticulously and regularly yanked out of our fingertips by the upholders of community, to forge us into obedient and pliable little shits, the entire concept of community would be rendered unworkable. </p>
<p> Both the metaphorical and literal concrete walls that contain us and our egos would quickly crumble into rubble without the authority of the community to hold them up. </p>
<p> There’s a word that describes how we feel when we need time to ourselves but can’t get it because we live in these vast interconnected global communities, surrounded wall-to-wall, block-to-block, nation-to-nation in every direction by other people and have no way to tune out their vociferous voices and energies. It’s the mirror image to loneliness – ‘aloneliness’. This innate state of being was surprisingly only coined recently, in 2019, by Robert Coplan, a Canadian psychologist. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Gustavo Rodriguez – The Rebellions of Misery
Tue, 23 Mar 2021 08:13:29 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Gustavo Rodriguez<br><strong>Title</strong>: The Rebellions of Misery<br><strong>Date</strong>: September 1, 2020<br><strong>Notes</strong>: Excerpted from the brochure <em>“The Aroma of Fire: The Rage of Despair in a Tri-Polar World”</em>, September, 2020.<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 2021-03-22 from<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p><em>“All control systems are based on the punishment/award binomial. When punishments are disproportionate to rewards and when employers no longer have any rewards left, uprisings occur.”</em></p>
<p><strong>Burroughs</strong><a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[1]</a></p>
<p> In the second decade of this century, urban revolts are becoming more frequent throughout the global geography, with subtle variations in duration and intensity. Hong Kong, France, Algeria, Iraq, Haiti, Lebanon, Catalonia, Ecuador, Bolivia, Sudan, Chile, Belarus, and now the <em>United States of America,</em> have been the sites of massive protests widely reported in the <em>means of mass domestication.</em> As I have pointed out on other occasions, these demonstrations have very particular motivations that explain them; however, it is indisputable that they all possess an intangible link that serves as a common denominator of most of these mobilizations: the weariness and rage of despair. </p>
<p> Far from the leftist rhetoric that insists against all evidence that “as long as there is misery there will be rebellion,” what has really motivated the recent rebellions has not been “misery” but the conjunction of weariness and despair. These two factors – which drive the nostalgia for the “devil you know” and yearn for the return to the welfare state, to industrial capitalism and to the society of labour – are the causes of the widespread unrest that has led to the global revolt of our days. </p>
<p> It is increasingly axiomatic that “misery” only produces “misery.” That is to say, servitude, begging and even the loss of all dignity. As the proverb goes, “hunger is a bad counsellor.” She is the mother of all those specimens that hang a sign around their neck that says “I will do any work” (<em>even for the SS,</em> as George Steiner reminds us). Therefore, instead of creating rebels and refusers, misery breeds disease, malnutrition, mortality, fear, sexual exploitation, corruption, soldiers, police, informants and voters: <em>human misery.</em></p>
<p> This is why misery is exalted by the left, knowing that the future is fattened in its jaws, as that is where future votes are counted. All we have to do is to consign some “prizes” and, to state abracadabra: the corpse-like clientele will remain guaranteed for a relatively long period of time, until “there are no more prizes” (<strong>Burroughs</strong> <em>dixit</em>) and the uprisings return. </p>
<p> This was already inferred by the famous author of <em>Les Misérables,</em> paving his brilliant political career with his successful literary career. In Book Seven of his well-known novel, entitled “The Slang,” the poet and novelist finishes off: </p>
<p> “Since 1789, the whole population is expanded in the sublimated individual; there is no poor person that, having his right, does not have his light ray; the most miserable and helpless feels in himself the honesty of France; the dignity of the citizen is an inner armour; he who is free is scrupulous; he who votes reigns. Hence incorruptibility; hence the abortion of disordered and unhealthy lusts; hence the heroic lowering of eyes in the face of temptation.”<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[2]</a></p>
<p> Victor Hugo, after throwing himself into the deep pool of misery, sees its wonderful potential. As Walter Benjamin rightly points out: </p>
<p><em>“He was the first great writer to use collective titles in his work: Les Misérables, Les travailleurs de la mer. The crowd meant to him, almost in an old sense, the crowd of customers — that is, his readers — and of his masses of voters.”</em><a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[3]</a></p>
<p> Certainly, misery has fuelled countless revolts in history but, unerringly, they have been “pacified” with proportional doses of garote (neutralization by fear), bread (neutralization by subsidisation<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[4]</a>) and, circus (consolation prizes and political reforms). It is precisely in the proportional application of these rations that lies the culmination of the “proletarian” concept, in reference to the landless citizens lacking work who made up the most miserable class of the Roman cities <em>(proletarius),</em> whose only utility — for the State — was their capacity to generate <em>proles</em> (descendants/children). </p>
<p> These hordes of excluded people were pacified with cudgels, bread and circuses and, used as a “repressive hand” (legionaries), swelling the reserves of the armies of the Empire. Such reflection, motivated <em>Saint Charlie of Trier</em> — fourteen centuries later — to make use of the term “proletarian,” landing its only definition in a tight note as pagefooter among the copious folios of <em>Das Capital,</em> where he delimits a priori all the botched work of the contemporary Marxians who try, arbitrarily, to subsume within the “proletarian” concept the most unbelievable configurations of identity (indigenous peoples and people of African descent) in an attempt to correct the racist constraints and the economic narrow-mindedness of the Marxian vision.<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[5]</a></p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Of clowns and prophets</div>
<p> Regarding “pauperism” or the <em>general misery</em> of the working classes, already in 1844–46, Proudhon said quoting Antoine Eugène Buret<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[6]</a>: </p>
<p><em>“The description of the misery of the working classes […], has something fantastic that frightens and oppresses the heart. These are scenes that the imagination refuses to believe, despite the certificates and government records. Naked husbands, hiding at the bottom of an unfurnished room, with their children also naked; entire populations that do not go to church on Sunday because they do not have even rags to cover themselves with; unburied corpses that lay for eight days because the deceased did not even have a shroud to wrap them in, nor money with which to pay for the coffin and the undertaker, while the bishop enjoys four or five hundred thousand francs in rent; whole families crowded together in miserable pigsties, living together with the pigs, and already in a life earned by rotting, or living in holes like the albinos; octogenarians sleeping naked on naked boards; the virgin and the prostitute expiring in the midst of the same nakedness and destitution; everywhere despair, consumption, hunger, famine! … And that people, who atone for the crimes of their masters, do not revolt!”</em><a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[7]</a> (my underlining). </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

A Las Barricadas – Interview with the Kurdistan Anarchists Forum (KAF) about the situation in Iraq/Kurdistan
Mon, 22 Mar 2021 15:37:47 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: A Las Barricadas<br><strong>Title</strong>: Interview with the Kurdistan Anarchists Forum (KAF) about the situation in Iraq/Kurdistan<br><strong>Date</strong>: 3<sup>rd</sup> September 2014<br><strong>Notes</strong>: <em>This interview was carried out by <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a> on 3<sup>rd</sup> September 2014. The English translation has been edited for readability by</em><br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 22<sup>nd</sup> March 2021 from <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a><br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p><strong>ALB: How are you now ?</strong></p>
<p> We are fine but like many of you extremely concerned about the current situation in Iraq in general and the Iraqi part of Kurdistan in particular. We are very active in the social media with respect to writing, making comments and discussing the current crisis that exists with different people and groups. </p>
<p><strong>Are you afraid that the ISIS attack will defeat the Peshmerga?</strong></p>
<p> Actually, the attack by ISIS is not just an attack on the Regional Kurdistan Government (KRG) forces or military (recognised as Peshmerga), it is attack on everybody. As you know ISIS is the darkest of forces and is far more brutal than any of the other terrorist groups. They do not distinguish between an armed people and the ordinary people. Wherever ISIS has entered, it has given the residents a very hard time by controlling them, subduing them by implementing Sharia Law. We are sure you have heard what happened already to he Yazidis, who are a peaceful people and did not fight with them at all. ISIS is no less brutal to Christians and Shias than the Yazidis, because they believe these people, all, are devils or evil. </p>
<p> We are more concerned about the actual war that the people in Iraq and Iraqi Kurdish are facing now, more than a defeat of the Peshmarga at the hands of ISIS. The KRG forces (Peshmerga) are the corrupt forces of the current political parties who are in power, mainly the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), whose leader is Massoud Barzany who is the president of Iraqi Kurdistan as well, and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), still led by Jalal Talabany, the former Iraqi president. There are also other forces from Islamic organisations and other small political parties. However, we know that these forces (Peshmerga) are a tool in the hands of the political parties and the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), but as you know we have nothing in common with them and always consider them to be a suppressing force. However, while Iraq and Kurdistan at the moment face the darkest forces in their current history, we should be worried about the Peshmerga being defeated. </p>
<p> There is another important point that we would like to bring to your attention. The Peshmerga at first were not just defeated: they actually fled without shooting a single bullet. If it were not because of the People’s Defence Units (PDU) and Women’s Defence Units (WDU) (the Syrian Kurdish forces) and later PKK, ISIS could easily have invaded the capital of Kurdistan, Irbil. If they had occupied Irbil then the rest of the Kurdistani towns would fall into their hands with no resistance or very little resistance. </p>
<p><strong>Are your people working in self-defence against ISIS?</strong></p>
<p> As we, KAF, previously stated, we are only a Virtual Forum, not a physical organization in that we have no people from the top to the bottom. The majority of us who write in our Forum (Seko) live abroad; we therefore can do nothing physically for the self-defence of Kurdistan. If you mean people in Kurdistan who agree with our ideas or are close to KAF, of course, they try to organize themselves to fight back. However, because there is no anarchist movement in Kurdistan, we are sorry to say that yes, there are no self-defence groups or movements as we see in Turkey and (Rojava) Syrian Kurdistan. We do believe the only force or power can defeat ISIS is independent self-defence from the mass of the people. Unfortunately this force or movement at the moment does not exist. </p>
<p><strong>What do you think of the US bombings?</strong></p>
<p> Before the US decided to bombard and hit the ISIS bases, there were a lot of rumours and news that ISIS was created by the US, UK and Israel. The more reliable evidence that we can refer to was from Edward Snowden about this. Now when they (UK and US) decide to attack ISIS and sell weapons to the KRG, it is to undermine Edward Snowden’s information and the rumours that spread widely. </p>
<p> We are against intervention from the US and Western countries and also selling weapons to the KRG. We know this is big business for them, that can make a lot of profits through this trade. We also do not want Kurdistan to become a battlefield for all the Jihadist groups in the world against the US, Western countries and the Kurdish, in which so many innocent people would be killed and many places would be destroyed. In addition, the war situation creates more haters between Kurds and Arabs, between Kurds and Sunnis. In the meantime it caused the emergence of many racist and fascist groups. </p>
<p> The only winners in the wars are the big companies who sell weapons and war equipment, and the losers – as always – are the poor people. </p>
<p><strong>Do you work with PYD/PKK/PÇDK?</strong></p>
<p> No we do not. Because we reject any support or co-operation with any hierarchal, political and authoritarian groups and organizations. We only line up ourselves and are interested in any resistance from the mass of people and the social movements wherever they are in this world and we are ready to support them by whatever means we can. </p>
<p><strong>As for your answers, in Iraq there is now a self-defence group called the Sinjar Protection Units (YPS). I think this is a creation of the YPG. Also the PÇDK is creating its own militia. I imagine that some rank-and-file peshmerga might now be looking at self-defence militias with sympathy. Do you think it is possible to have over the next few months an autonomous canton in Iraq, similar to those in Rojava? (I mean autonomous with respect to the KRG, the US and everything else.)</strong></p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Direct Unionists – Direct Unionism
Mon, 22 Mar 2021 09:00:03 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Direct Unionists<br><strong>Title</strong>: Direct Unionism<br><strong>Subtitle</strong>: A Discussion Paper<br><strong>Date</strong>: 2011<br><strong>Notes</strong>: A discussion paper put together by some members of the Industrial Workers of the World revolutionary syndicalist union, arguing for the organisation to build a network of militants rather than attempt to represent members. The paper was never fully finished. The early parts are finished but as the paper goes on it gets rougher and toward the end is more like notes.<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 2021-03-22 from<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Introduction: Process and Product</div>
<p> This paper, Direct Unionism, grew out of a few places. A group of us became friends through working together on IWW projects. We had three basic things in common — some experiences of local struggle and organization in different places, participation in the IWW beyond our immediate locations, and a common set of ideas which we had mostly picked up through things we had read. Our experiences were and are powerful and the memories of the past struggles remain powerful ones that we will always carry in our hearts. The IWW is dear to us, we work hard to build it, and we know it is not yet what it could and should be. The ideas we’ve picked up are also dear to us, we don’t know how to think without them, and yet their clarity is sometimes misleading. What we’ve lived has been messier than what we’ve read, and things seem to rarely move in straight lines in the way we have expected. None of this added up together neatly, in part because we hadn’t done enough serious reflection and put the effort in to make it all make sense. This paper is an attempt to make all of those things fit together better. We don’t get all the puzzle pieces in place, but we are clearer than we were. We hope that this paper can help others similarly put pieces in place, and we look forward to learning from others in discussion in response to it. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Process</div>
<p> This is a discussion paper that has been sitting for a while now. Over a period of a year and a half or so several of us read drafts, suggested revisions, and discusses many ideas that came up along the way. It was an incredibly productive discussion that changed people’s minds and helped us develop our ideas. </p>
<p> While several people had a hand in this, most of the actual words here were written by one person. XX took up the challenge and took the time to try to put clear words to a vision of union organizing. A lot of us believe in this vision, but it’s vague. XX tried to make that vision more concrete and the results had lots of benefits for everyone who was part of the conversation. The process that this piece came out of was very valuable and clarifying. </p>
<p> We’re putting this piece out now in the hope to create further discussion. We hope people talk about this and write responses to it. This is not because any of us want to be the center of attention, it’s because we have gotten so much ourselves from this sort of discussion and we think others might benefit from having similar conversations. We would especially love if this sparked additional written responses. Writing is hard, and it’s worth the challenge. More people should do it. </p>
<p> That’s another reason we put this out, because we think in general we need more in-depth discussion through sustained reflections and arguments — through writing, rather than just writing emails and internet forum posts and so on. The early IWW had several publications that regularly put out long pieces, sometimes serialized over multiple issues. This helped the organization think. So in addition to the contents of this paper, we offer this paper as an example of the kind of thing we want to see more of. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Product</div>
<p> Enough about the process, let’s talk about the product for a moment. Direct Unionism tries to give a clear and straightforward vision for building unions in the workplace where the workers recognize themselves as the union. There are some other terms for this — solidarity unionism is one that we use a lot in the IWW. People should check out Staughton Lynd’s book Solidarity Unionism and his book co-written with Daniel Gross called Labor Law for the Rank and Filer; the pamphlet A Union On Our Own Terms and the columns Minorty Report by Alexis Buss, and the Workers Power column that runs regularly in the Industrial Worker newspaper and online at </p>
<p> These pieces mentioned and some others have tried to lay out some of the basic concepts and principles for this vision of unionism. Direct Unionism does so as well. Direct Unionism tries to go further, though, and lay out a more practical or imaginable vision. Sometimes discussions of this vision of unionism only stay at the level of principle, or worse sometimes they stay only at the level of rejection: “noncontractual” unionism, for example, which defines itself entirely by what it is not and what we want to void rather than offering a positive vision of what we actually want to see. </p>
<p> Part of the problem with remaining at the level of principle is that principles are hard to imagine. Principles matter a lot. We also need stories, though. We need to be able describe in specific and concrete detail what we want to do in response to our principles. We need to be able to have detailed scenarios we can visualize — for actions, ways of organizing ourselves, and above all for how we will spend our time concretely in organizing day to day, week to week, and month to month. We need models and plans. There is much more that could be said — as we said, we would love to see more pieces of writing in response, this is the start to a conversation rather than the last word — but we think that what is here is worth engaging with. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Various Authors – An Iconoclastic Monstrocity
Mon, 22 Mar 2021 04:57:56 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Various Authors<br><strong>Title</strong>: An Iconoclastic Monstrocity<br><strong>Subtitle</strong>: Disability Against Civilization<br><strong>Date</strong>: 2017-09-07<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 1/24/2021 from<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> In the vast ocean of social war, some rebels – damaged, frail, or terminally ill – refuse to surrender to the victimization of disability. The world-builders attempt to subdue them with peace-offerings of technospheric assimilation and consumerist comforts. But these rebels – these <em>monsters</em> – refuse anything less than a hostile, insubordinate revolt against the domesticating machine… </p>
<p> This zine compiles the voices of some of these rebels. Together in this zine, and individually in their daily lives, they conspire to challenge the victimizing and civilizing narrative of disability discourse, while also taking aim at civilization itself. </p>
<p><em>The standardization of mass society necessarily defines an increasing number of people as “disabled” if they do not fit a narrowly prescribed form. The “normal range” of human variation is being shrunk and those outside of this range are stigmatized, pathologized, medicated, and manipulated. The civilized solution to living with people of different abilities is to treat large segments of people like broken clocks in need of new parts or regular servicing. This approach is in accordance with the standard operating procedure of civilization to understand every human problem as a technical problem; it allows us to discharge our responsibility to care for those around us by developing new products, offering new services, and building new infrastructure. The need for relationships is erased. In this way, civilization allows us not to care for others who may need assistance, which is to say, it allows others not to care for us when we need assistance.</em><br />- From the zine <em>“CIVILIZATION WILL STUNT YOUR GROWTH: Defending Primitivism from Accusations of Ableism”</em> by Ian E. Smith </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>“On Anti-psychiatry and Emotional Crisis” by Anonymous</div>
<p> I don’t want to adapt. </p>
<p> Therapists are professionals who earn money to make us accept the constraints of society. </p>
<p> The psychologist &quot;diagnosed&quot; me and &quot;gave me&quot; medicine to cure my &quot;mental illness&quot;. in fact, he put me a mental label to give himself the power to manage my inadequacy, gave me medication for Chemical control of my emotions, and when he felt that I was not réinsérable or might disturb public order, he kept me locked in the hp by being humiliated and tortured. </p>
<p> The psychologist told me he just wanted to &quot;be there&quot;, and &quot;help me by the word&quot;. in fact, I had the right to his compassion feint by professional obligation and his well-being of left bourgeois. </p>
<p> The Analyst offered to help me &quot;to make my unconscious desire come out&quot;, as if my desire had chances to emerge without making too many waves in the current world. In fact, it does not basically question the structures such as patriarchy or money. Getting to his level of resignation &quot;good enough&quot;, this is the highest idea of freedom it is. </p>
<p> This society has been crushing me since the birth of the weight of all its standards. How do you want these therapists, who all seek their way to make me accept the world as it is, can be of any help? By making me believe that the only solution to my discomfort is in a certain degree of submission to Trying to kill yourself sometimes simply means that we don’t want to lead the life we lead anymore. It takes a huge dose of courage and strength to try to end your own life. We can use this strength to end it with everything that will hurt us, starting with school, family, work, false-pretend, fears, shame, and all commitment to the values of society! </p>
<p> &quot;Crazy&quot; by breaking everything at home, insulting police, where by making up imaginary worlds, sometimes simply means that you can’t stand the unbearable anymore. How do we convince therapists to convince us that these reactions are pathological?! If we enter &quot;crisis&quot; with this world, it is not to go to a psy we would need (even if many have no other choices ) but to find the real help of partners who understand our evil and share our desires, and then act directly against everything that oppresses us. </p>
<p> Our paths are multiple, sometimes extreme, never pathological! Let’s not leave the therapists the power to give meaning to our &quot;crisis&quot;; who knows if each of them is not an opportunity to release? Let us not be alone in the face of their power that isolated: let us share all the experiences, from the most modest to the most daring, that allowed us to do without hassle or escape from their prisons. Let’s find other ways to cross our extreme states without falling against walls. Let’s determine ourselves when, by whom and how we want to be helped and help others. Let’s create our own means of helping and fight, and attack without </p>
<p> delay what we are… </p>
<p> Solidarity with all the oppressed in struggle! </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>“Disabled, Black, Trans and a Primitivist? Why I dislike the ProCivilization Narrative” by BLACK LUDDITE</div>
<p> I believe that civilization and its byproducts are inherently limiting. As someone whose labeled disabled in the modern world, I despise civilization and what it has done for people like me. The left would call me a fascist, that I am promoting eugenics, transphobia, and social conservatism when this is the farthest from what I believe. The anti-left, anti-tech, anti-civ primitivist movement is liberation for those who are just seen as the prefilled metaphysical boxes as: the trash of society, the sinners, the lucifers of the world! These accusations are based on the oversocialization of left spaces which is followed by extreme uncritical morality. Ted Kaczinsky coined the term oversocialization; he describes its manifestation as, “[The] person cannot even experience, without guilt, thoughts or feelings that are contrary to the accepted morality; he cannot think ‘unclean’ thoughts” <a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[1]</a> . In this case, the leftist thinks that by trying to defend minority groups (trans people, disabled people, people of color) they are on the untouchable high horse. However, this high horse is not infallible. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

ziq – Anarchy & Religion
Mon, 22 Mar 2021 02:49:11 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: ziq<br><strong>Title</strong>: Anarchy &amp; Religion<br><strong>Date</strong>: August 2020<br><strong>Source</strong>:<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Branded by Society</div>
<p> For a long time, people have identified as &quot;Christian-anarchists&quot;, &quot;Jewish-anarchists&quot;, &quot;Muslim-anarchists&quot;, and so on. This is accepted without question in most anarchist circles, where goals of inclusivity tend to supersede any misgivings people might have with the inherent top-down and patriarchal nature of most religious affiliations. </p>
<p> I don’t think it makes any sense to try and merge anarchy with these explicit systems of authority, and much like &quot;anarcho-capitalism&quot;, I think attempting to hitch anarchy’s wagon to blatant forms of authority is a misguided impulse that comes about in people who have been thoroughly indoctrinated in authoritarian systems and are unwilling to fully part with forms of authority they have nostalgic attachment to. The feeling of comfort or security their religion provides them with leads to them trying to reform their religion into something more egalitarian when they decide they like the economic and societal ideas presented by anarchy, but don’t wish to part with their long-held religious beliefs. </p>
<p> I feel I should be clear that anarchists have no right to force their views on people that subscribe to organized religion. I simply want to explore some of the inherently authority-based principles religious organizations hold as sacrosanct and try to understand why religious anarchists feel the need to essentially retcon their favored religion to force a tenuous compatibility with anarchy. </p>
<p> As usual, I should also be clear I don’t ascribe to the concept of an &quot;anarchist society&quot;, so this isn’t an attempt to say religion should be &quot;banned&quot; in a non-existing &quot;anarchist society&quot;. I don’t think such a thing possible. </p>
<p> Anarchy is an anti-authoritarian mindset, an ongoing process we all go through to question and overcome authority. It is not a artificially constructed system, or a &quot;society&quot; to govern people by. It’s not a permanent state of affairs where authority somehow ceases to exist. Authority will always exist, and will especially thrive within formal systems of power and control where conformity and obedience are held up as desirable. And if a group of people did somehow &quot;achieve&quot; anarchy, and then try to forbid people from having religious beliefs, that anarchy would of course immediately be lost in the attempt to assert authority over others. </p>
<p> You can certainly be religious (&quot;spiritual&quot;) without supporting authority. You can believe in other-earthly beings or spirits or even gods without needing to build hierarchies and authoritarian rituals around them. But almost all &quot;Big Religion&quot; is absolutely authority-based and was designed that way from its inception. </p>
<p> Monotheism was created by civilized men to accustom the peasantry to being ruled by a great man in the sky, so they’d be equally as amenable to being ruled by a great man in a castle (or later: a presidential palace or a factory or an office). </p>
<p> The authority of monotheism was rapidly forced on the world at the point of the sword, replacing polytheism in the vast majority of cultures. Religious and civil leaders deemed polytheists to be &quot;uncivilized heathens&quot; and slaughtered them if they refused to fall in line with the new world order. It was no accident that monotheism and civilization evolved side by side. Diverse polycultures replaced by a rigid global monoculture that could be easily dominated by rulers. </p>
<p> Slavery was greatly assisted by several of these new monotheist religions that directly condoned the practice, providing easy moral justification for slave owners, and keeping slaves from resisting the system, lest they suffer eternal damnation. The Roman church loudly condemned slaves who escaped their masters, and refused them communion. It’s not hard to understand why religious societies were so quick to prop up slavery when the holy books they live their lives by go out of their way to normalize the practice: </p>
<p> &quot;Cursed be Canaan! The lowest of slaves will he be to his brothers&quot; (Gn 9:25) </p>
<p> This is a quote from the Old Testament, where Noah condemns Canaan (Son of Ham) to eternal slavery. Christians and some Muslims then identified Ham’s descendants as black Africans, which allowed them to morally justify centuries of racialized slavery in their societies, constructing the idea that certain members of the human race should live in perpetual servitude to them. This is a recurring theme with organized religion, as religious documents invariably build authority in the cultures that hold them up as sacred. </p>
<p> The New Testament continued the tradition of telling the faithful to accept bondage and goes further in telling slaves to accept their slave-masters like they would a God: </p>
<p> Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not people. (Ephesians 6:5-7) </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Apatris – Anarchist Armed Struggle in Rojava and Beyond
Sun, 21 Mar 2021 12:30:21 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Apatris<br><strong>Title</strong>: Anarchist Armed Struggle in Rojava and Beyond<br><strong>Subtitle</strong>: An Interview with the IRPGF<br><strong>Date</strong>: May 19, 2017<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 21<sup>st</sup> March 2021 from <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a><br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p><strong>1. First of all thanks for agreeing to this interview, it’s most appreciated comrades! To start off with, how many comrades are in the IRPGF, and if you are comfortable answering this, what countries are you all from?</strong></p>
<p> Unfortunately, for security reasons, we cannot divulge the number of IRPGF members currently in Rojava taking part in operations nor the countries they come from, as this kind of information may be used by states to identify the members. However, we can say that IRPGF comprises revolutionaries from both the ‘East’ and the ‘West’. </p>
<p><strong>2. Prior to the formation of the IRPGF were you all members of the International Freedom Battalion? If not how did you all meet up?</strong></p>
<p> The IRPGF is a project that was in development for months before its announcement. This development took place in and across several different countries. However, if one wants to also take into consideration the building of the necessary revolutionary relationships and connections that formed the foundation of IRPGF, one could say the development of the IRPGF actually dates back years. Many of these connections were made via meeting people in person, struggling shoulder-to-shoulder with them in their respective movements, and maintaining relationships of solidarity long after we were no longer in the same physical space, which ultimately led to the creation of a network of serious and dedicated anarchists hungry to advance the movement by any means necessary. So, while some of us were indeed members of the IFB prior to the formation of the IRPGF, the group itself has origins both in and outside the region. </p>
<p><strong>3. What inspired you all to form the IRPGF? What constraints did you experience as anarchists training and or fighting within a non-anarchist battalion prior to the formation of the IRPGF? What do you plan to do differently in the IRPGF compared to other volunteer groups in Rojava that are fighting the Islamic State?</strong></p>
<p> The formation of the IRPGF was inspired by various factors but two of the most important was the lack of an anarchist presence on the ground in Rojava and the desire to introduce something to the movement that has not yet been seen, which is a space, strictly for anarchists, to escape from the state, train in both guerrilla and conventional warfare for their respective struggles back home, and gain experience in how a revolution functions on a social level. While we have of course come across our fair share of anarchists that have refused to support the revolution because it doesn’t live up to their romanticized, ideal commune, we are also aware of the fact that many anarchists have decided to hold back from going to Rojava because of the abundance of hammers and sickles and lack of circle A’s. Thus, we saw it as imperative to change this political landscape and carve out a space for anarchism to not only exist but thrive. </p>
<p> This in turn makes our project fundamentally different than any other group here that exists solely to fight DAÎŞ. While we are obviously involved in operations against DAÎŞ, our aims go beyond defeating them, calling it a day, and heading home. We will indeed fight fascism in any shape it comes in, but we will do so while also building anarchist infrastructure in the region that makes it possible for anarchists to come, learn, and advance their respective struggles accordingly. In short, we are thinking about the big picture, which is the revolution spreading beyond Rojava, and as such we are fighting just as much for anarchism as we are for Rojava and anti-fascism. As far as experiencing constraints training and fighting within non-anarchist battalions before the formation of IRPGF – let’s just say that any international that didn’t know about anarchism before they met us knew more about it than they would ever have wanted to after. However, our experiences with folks from the region have been very positive, with many explicitly describing their own politics as anarchist. </p>
<p><strong>4. What is your response to criticisms from some anarchists and leftists in the West that groups like the IRPGF, despite good intentions and practices, are comprised primarily of white activists who are basically seeking thrills or ‘self-discovery’? As you are no doubt already aware, this has also been a dominant narrative that has featured in Western media regarding volunteers from the West who are fighting for Rojava.</strong></p>
<p> A question arises: What conditions and circumstances are required, for those who claim to be committed to fighting capital and the nation-state, those who live in safety and security, those often pursuing academic careers and individualist pursuits, to take the risks, make the sacrifices and give their lives to the struggle? It seems that many have a vision of a perfect revolutionary situation in which everything falls into place and they find themselves thrust into struggle, a struggle that fits into the continuity of their lives. </p>
<p> There are war tourists here. We have met them. They are largely ex-military who want a 6 month (or less if possible) adventure of killing the bad guys which their own governments couldn’t give them, so they use YPG, disrespect YPG and the revolution for which they have no concern. They complain that the locals are not grateful when in fact it is them who should be grateful to the people who have given over their lives to fight for all of humanity, without the privilege or ability to retire to a comfortable life in the west. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Sun, 21 Mar 2021 09:15:18 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Noche<br><strong>Title</strong>: PURA ACRACIA<br><strong>Date</strong>: August 23, 2020<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 2021-03-21 from<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p><strong><em>What follows is a series of anti-political arguments against the police, politics y más.</em></strong></p>
<p><em>Politics</em> itself is the <em>policing</em> of freedom &amp; unfreedom. <em>Freedom</em>, as we are taught in American schools, is not freedom itself. </p>
<p> It is a doctored variation <em>sold</em> to us. It helps maintainthe assumption that the perpetuation of American politics is itself tied to perpetuation of freedom. (“Vote or don’t complain!”) </p>
<div class=”right”>
<p> Nothing could be further from the truth. </p>
<p> This is why those of us with an <em>anti-political</em> position say we are for <em>anarchy</em>: freedom is a word with too much American patriotic baggage. </p>
<div class=”right”>
<p> For the purposes of this piece, I will refer to the condition of territorial statelessness (which is akin to freedom) as <em>anarchy.</em></p>
<p> But then what is <em>anti-politics</em>? Is it the inversion of <em>politics</em>? (Many radicals see radical politics as a grand inversion of bourgeois politics: now <em>the people</em> are in power. A formulation I disagree with, which I’ll get to later.) </p>
<div class=”right”>
<p> Anti-politics is the <em>active negation</em> and consequent <em>abolition</em> of politics. </p>
<p> But what is politics? With the development of ancient Greek democracy, the <em>polis</em> (where the term <em>politics</em> emerges from) denoted a body of <em>citizens</em> who have a direct say in local governance. <em>Politics</em> is that which concerns the <em>polis.</em> And what is citizenship? Adherence to and recognition by the State. A dividing of the population. </p>
<p> But not all citizens under the current racial regime of Capital are equals. </p>
<p> In <em>Black Marxism</em>, Robinson shows this is by historical design. Black people have been held outside the realm of the State’s formal equality since the inception of capitalism and continue to be so even after the supposed end of chattel slavery. </p>
<p> I stand against <em>anti-blackness</em> and the marker of <em>race,</em> which <strong><em>always also</em></strong> means standing <em>against policing</em>. The State is the wing of <em>direct</em> anti-black domination and the police its foot soldiers. Thus I am <em>against the State</em> even in its democratic forms. </p>
<p><em>Politics</em> is that which is used to <em>mediate</em> between contentious bodies. A perpetuation of antagonistic contradictions, rarely their resolution: to form a social peace to ensure the perpetuation of the current racial regime of Capital. <strong><em>To keep the money flowing.</em></strong></p>
<p> The perfection of politics can be found in democracy: class-collaboration at its finest. As the writers of <em>Dixie Be Damned</em> put it, “White supremacy’s greatest ally in this country has been democracy, not fascism.” But the anti-blackness of the racial regime of Capital is more than just a formalized White supremacy. </p>
<p> To be an anarchist then is to not only be against the State but also <em>against politics</em>. </p>
<div class=”center”>
<p> Because as @nkoyenkoyenkoye puts it, </p>
<p><em><strong>“Politics is police.”</strong></em></p>
<p> The police as protectors of the political order physically embody the law: the bureaucratic wing of the State. The formalization of dominance. </p>
<hr />
<p> The latest wave of Black revolt and the riots it has sparked have had an explicit target: the police and their power deployed to protect property <em>against</em> Black life. But some bristle at this target. </p>
<p> I recall back in 2014 a white communist asking in a reading group, “<em>when will people rise up against indirect domination and not just direct domination</em>?” Which is Euro-Marxist speech for, “<em>why are Black people fighting the police and not the wage-relation</em>?” As though the two are not linked. </p>
<p> A now common refrain by the radical milieu is that the recent riots <em>worked</em>. That they have produced results that would have not occurred otherwise. This is true. The history of revolt in the so-called United States of America is a testimony to this. </p>
<hr />
<p> But the instrumentalization of the riot as a thing that ‘works’ misunderstands the riot. This is projected onto the riot after the fact. It is an attempt to make the riot <em>political.</em> To make it legible to State power. </p>
<p> Though the riot, as expressed by racialized proles, is essentially <em>anti-political</em>. The white racist riot is fascism in its extra-legal street mode (see the Tulsa Race Riot &amp; the Zoot Suit Riots). </p>
<p> Rioters are indeed often the disenfranchised, but the riot is not an act <em>for</em> integration into the racial regime but an act against it. Rioters are not trying to communicate a program to be fulfilled <em>by</em> the State as much as acting directly and openly against the <em>present state of things</em>. Otherwise a peaceful march ending with a stage and a list of speakers is in order. </p>
<p> Thus the conclusion of an anti-police (as well as anti-carceral) position is <em>anti-politics</em>. </p>
<p> Some say we need <em>another</em> politics. I say the world of politics has had its day and those against it are the ones who will carry the day to freedom. </p>
<div class=”right”>
<p><strong><em>For anarchy &amp; communism.</em></strong></p>
<div class=”amw-teaser-no-ellipsis”></div>

John Moore – Anarchist Speculations
Sun, 21 Mar 2021 02:49:11 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: John Moore<br><strong>Title</strong>: Anarchist Speculations<br><strong>Subtitle</strong>: Writings by John Moore<br><strong>Date</strong>: 2016<br><strong>Notes</strong>: Introduction by Aragorn! Acknowledgments for Lovebite: The author would like to thank Arnold and Betty Moore, Ed Baxter and Andy Hopton for making this publication possible.<br><strong>Source</strong>: retrieved from<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Introduction</div>
<p> It is uncomfortable to write an appreciation of someone you have never met. Especially, as is the case here, when our shared characteristics include a preference for face-to-face contact, for critiques that are stylistic rather than just textual, and for a kind of gezellig (cozy) familiarity. If l had my way, John Moore would be considered in the company of the most important second wave anarchist thinkers so far, alongside John Zerzan, Bob Black, and Hakim Bey. He originated the term (an obvious homage to feminism’s waves), which I have borrowed as a better descriptor than post-situationist, post-leftist, or other similar jabberwocky. Moore was an anarchist who believed in the anarchist milieu, who wrote for an anarchist audience, and who attempted to use shortcut terminology to encompass wide swaths of conceptual territory. We share all of these traits, for reasons I will be getting into, and this anthology serves as my offering to his memory (He passed in 2002 — while he was about the age I am now — from a heart attack while racing for a bus). </p>
<p> While he did not write a magna opus like Fredy Perlman’s Against History, Against Leviathan or Letters of Insurgents, nor continue to write into his dotage (since he didn’t have one), Moore followed, perhaps, the more anarchist path. He produced a few writings about a wide range of topics. He tried not to get stuck to a particular thing (like an ideology). He stayed playful throughout the process. He didn’t make enemies due to his cruelty. </p>
<p> Which is not to say that he was not controversial. One of the more surprising things about Moore’s obituary <a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[1]</a> was the liberal use of ad hominems (that we’ll consider later). His intellectual interests included topics that for some are antithetical to a proper anarchist: spirituality, mythology, textual interpretation, civilization, art, Nietzsche, and of course anarchy. </p>
<p><em>There is only one overwhelming project: the revolutionary and comprehensive transformation of human life in an anarchist direction, and the self-realisation of my individuality in conjunction with generalised self-realisation through the destruction of power and the construction of a free life. All of my personal projects are subsets of this project.</em></p>
<div class=”right”>
<p> Interview with John Filiss<br />page374 </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Primitivism</div>
<p> John Moore considered himself an anarcho-primitivist. He wrote a primer to this extent (&quot;A Primitivist Primer,&quot; page 15) and later on, a defense (page 24). Reading these texts today is refreshing as they have such a different approach to the term as has been used since his passing. Here is the heart of his position: </p>
<p><em>Individuals associated with this current do not wish to be adherents of an ideology, merely people who seek to become free individuals in free communities in harmony with one another and with the biosphere, and may therefore refuse to be limited by the term ‘anarcho-primitivist’ or any other ideological talking. At best, then, anarcho-primitivism is a convenient label used to characterise diverse individuals with a common project: the abolition of all power relations — e.g., structures of control, coercion, domination, and exploitation-and the creation of a form of community that excludes all such relations.</em></p>
<div class=”right”>
<p> —A Primitivist Primer </p>
<p> Far from a defense of anthropological thinking, this is a (small s) social form of anarchism that emphasizes the planet over factories, organization, or ideology. One could say it is an emphasis on living in the world rather than perfecting it or the animals that run amok in it. </p>
<p> In 2016 this use of the term &quot;anarcho-primitivism&quot; seems strange. Today there are orthodox and humorless priests who have sucked all of the creative, anarchic energy out of the term. They have gated and defended it. They have divorced it from its potential allies and collaborators (note the attitude of Black and Green Review to Black Seed). They have sealed the position in plastic wrap, waiting for a future-saint to ascend, so the holy texts can be selected. The rock upon which this church will be built just awaits a council of Nicaea to settle some doctrinal issues. </p>
<p> So let us return to the origins and past utilizations of the term, why Moore would stand by it, and what the three original authors (Perlman, Zerzan, and Moore) intended versus what has actually resulted from this hyphenation. </p>
<p> First, I’ll state my own position. I believe that anarcho-hyphenations tend to favor the non-anarchist side of the hyphen and should be avoided. Anarcho-communists tend to prefer discussions and work that relates to the economy over the furious power of anarchy. Green anarchists tend to discuss and work around issues of environmentalism and spirituality rather than issues of power related to the state and capitalism. Anarcho-primitivism shares this fate. The two modern masters of AP (they know who they are) discuss topics of more interest to fringe anthropologists or eco-psychologists than generalists of an anarchist persuasion. This burden of hyphenation wasn’t necessarily the way it had to happen. Hyphenated positions can just be a way to state a preference, to work through the extremes of a position, or to compensate for the fact that so many partisans of positions have gone quiet in our modern era,. replaced by mealy mouthed voyeurs who swipe left and right on the infinite choices life presents them. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

David Graeber – After the Pandemic, We Can’t Go Back to Sleep
Sat, 20 Mar 2021 14:09:58 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: David Graeber<br><strong>Title</strong>: After the Pandemic, We Can’t Go Back to Sleep<br><strong>Date</strong>: March 2021<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 2021-03-20 from<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> In an essay penned shortly before his death, David Graeber argued that post-pandemic, we can’t slip back into a reality where the way our society is organized — to serve every whim of a small handful of rich people while debasing and degrading the vast majority of us — is seen as sensible or reasonable. </p>
<p> Before he tragically died at the untimely age of fifty-one in September 2020, the anarchist, anthropologist, and organizer David Graeber wrote this essay on what life and politics could look like after the COVID-19 pandemic. <em>Jacobin</em> is proud to publish Graeber’s essay for the first time. </p>
<hr />
<p> At some point in the next few months, the crisis will be declared over, and we will be able to return to our “nonessential” jobs. For many, this will be like waking from a dream. </p>
<p> The media and political classes will definitely encourage us to think of it this way. This is what happened after the 2008 financial crash. There was a brief moment of questioning. (What is “finance,” anyway? Isn’t it just other people’s debts? What is money? Is it just debt, too? What’s debt? Isn’t it just a promise? If money and debt are just a collection of promises we make to each other, then couldn’t we just as easily make different ones?) The window was almost instantly shut by those insisting we shut up, stop thinking, and get back to work, or at least start looking for it. </p>
<p> Last time, most of us fell for it. This time, it is critical that we do not. </p>
<p> Because, in reality, the crisis we just experienced <em>was</em> waking from a dream, a confrontation with the actual reality of human life, which is that we are a collection of fragile beings taking care of one another, and that those who do the lion’s share of this care work that keeps us alive are overtaxed, underpaid, and daily humiliated, and that a very large proportion of the population don’t do anything at all but spin fantasies, extract rents, and generally get in the way of those who are making, fixing, moving, and transporting things, or tending to the needs of other living beings. It is imperative that we not slip back into a reality where all this makes some sort of inexplicable sense, the way senseless things so often do in dreams. </p>
<p> How about this: Why don’t we stop treating it as entirely normal that the more obviously one’s work benefits others, the less one is likely to be paid for it; or insisting that financial markets are the best way to direct long-term investment even as they are propelling us to destroy most life on Earth? </p>
<p> Why not instead, once the current emergency is declared over, actually remember what we’ve learned: that if “the economy” means anything, it is the way we provide each other with what we need to be alive (in every sense of the term), that what we call “the market” is largely just a way of tabulating the aggregate desires of rich people, most of whom are at least slightly pathological, and the most powerful of whom were already completing the designs for the bunkers they plan to escape to if we continue to be foolish enough to believe their minions’ lectures that we were all, collectively, too lacking in basic common sense do anything about oncoming catastrophes. </p>
<p> This time around, can we please just ignore them? </p>
<p> Most of the work we’re currently doing is dream-work. It exists only for its own sake, or to make rich people feel good about themselves, or to make poor people feel bad about themselves. And if we simply stopped, it might be possible to make ourselves a much more reasonable set of promises: for instance, to create an “economy” that lets us actually take care of the people who are taking care of us. </p>
<div class=”amw-teaser-no-ellipsis”></div>

Michela Ortu, Pierleone Porcu – Without Delay
Sat, 20 Mar 2021 11:06:48 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Michela Ortu, Pierleone Porcu<br><strong>Title</strong>: Without Delay<br><strong>Date</strong>: September 16, 2016<br><strong>Source</strong>:<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> Tired of being an island within the island: </p>
<p> We are breaking the silence! </p>
<p> ‘[…]– Down the mask. <br /> – The time is always ripe to get rid of injustice when injustice exists. – Do you wait for the man to be back on his feet before raising him up again? – That will be the moment to give him help? – Or when he is lying down? Or when the assailant is on top of him? Or when he asks you for help?’ <br /> Carlo Cafiero </p>
<p> What is our struggle. What is our life. </p>
<p> In the present totalitarian democratic regime, the multitudes of excluded thrown to the edges of this global society are rendered invisible, useless, left to themselves because they are considered the inevitable “waste” of the highly specialized technological/capitalist production. And just as many are those who, exploited and oppressed, are suspended on the edge of the abyss and plodding on the slopes of the system that makes them chronic medical cases and infantilises them in the oppressive network of laws and assistance-dependency for life by the booming business of the “tertiary sector” that makes them outcasts of blackmail and misery, distrustful of each other, in the contest for crumbs. </p>
<p> The most striking outcome of this incessant seesaw of economic, social, moral, cultural, sentimental etc. obscenities is that, between compulsory servitude and involuntary servitude, the most widespread practice between exploitation and oppression becomes the breakdown into individual categories, dispossessed of oneself and crumbling among millions of particles upon which hordes of vampires parasitize and fatten themselves to the point of their total cancellation. </p>
<p> Thus, under the weight of authority, religions, unbridled consumerism and subservience to the bitter end, hosts of workers, unemployed, migrants and excluded of all kinds of give up fighting, they cowardly accept to barter their dignity and, slaves of their own ignorance and opportunism, albeit discriminated against and humiliated on the one hand in turn reproduce discrimination and constant humiliation on the other; completely dependent on and addicted to delegating, they even feel proud to claim the “subjects’ freedom” of being allowed to decide who should be elected in the government of the day; and having internalized authority to such a point, at every turn appeal to so-called State security, the institutions, the rule of law, the courts, the cops, judges, politicians, religious leaders, psychiatrists, social workers, voluntary work of every kind etc., in the illusory expectation and hope of being inserted by and into the system if thrown out, or become integrated if they are not yet settled. </p>
<p> Rather than react by violently rebelling against the blackmail, humiliation and abuses suffered every day on their skin and against the devastation and the poisoning of their territories, they give the bosses and rulers in power their life in exchange for work and security in exchange for freedom and, under the hallucinating expectation of an unlikely “class collaboration” with their oppressors, delegate, as well as to the politicians, the same bosses and capitalists, the changing of their own destiny, not giving a shit, among other things, if they themselves are contributing, with their so-called “work” to producing poisons, bombs, repression, destruction and death. </p>
<p> Stripping bare all miserable appearances in papier mache on sale in cheap deals as free panaceas to get idiotised with psycho-virtual type surrogates, and in the face of the putrid spectacle of real reality and the concrete cultural and moral regression of individuals and human relations in all spheres of existence, we do not intend to remain helpless. </p>
<p> In addition to the inevitable and profound changes that follow one another by the bagful in the society, rendered apathetic on all fronts, this organization of power has so altered social relations, culture and human sociality that, in general, while speaking one and all the same language it is as if between individuals one does not want or has no more interest in meaning and understanding, rebelling, discussing, acting in emancipatory ways or, even worse, no one seems to take anything seriously, neither facts nor problems nor discourse nor the persons or the actions or the countless economic and everyday social injustices produced by the machinery of the system on the skin of individuals; as though what happens and overwhelms had no more power and strength to shake the sensitivity and trigger the anger and the desire to revolt, the awareness and the will to react attacking violently and materially those responsible for all this. </p>
<p> Nevertheless, in this seemingly resigned dragging of oneself into reality, where, between a few gasps of rebellion most jostle in the sea of indifference, fear and hypocrisy to the benefit of power, in the strictly paradoxical internetian virtual world, surrogate for real action, millions of soliloquies ripple, even antagonistic, but all obviously subtracted from concrete and real action and without risk, all invariably returned to sender! </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Camillo Berneri – Marxism and the Extinction of the State
Sat, 20 Mar 2021 04:01:02 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Camillo Berneri<br><strong>Title</strong>: Marxism and the Extinction of the State<br><strong>Date</strong>: 1936<br><strong>Notes</strong>: Originally published in <em>Guerra di classe</em> (Barcelona), 9/10/1936. Translation by João Black, who thanks comrades @exiliaex and @MattCrossin for helping in the revision<br><strong>Source</strong>: The italian anthology “Pietrogrado 1917 Barcellona 1937: scritti scelti”: <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a><br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> For some time now, it has happened frequently in the field of anti-fascist Italian emigration, both in public meetings and in friendly discussions, to hear anarchists attribute a statolater [<em>statolatra</em>] tendency to Marxism, which is actually found in certain currents of social democracy that refer to Marxism, but which cannot be ascertained when one goes directly back to Marxist socialism. </p>
<p> The disappearance of the State is clearly prophesied by Marx and Engels and this explains the possibility that there has been, within the 1<sup>st</sup> International, of a political coexistence between Marxist socialists and Bakuninist socialists, a coexistence that would not have been possible without that theoretical coincidence. </p>
<p> Marx wrote, in <em>The Poverty of Philosophy</em>: </p>
<p><em>The working class, in the course of its development, will replace the ancient civil society with an association that will exclude classes and their antagonisms, and there will no longer be political power as such.</em></p>
<p> Engels, in turn, stated in <em>Anti-Dühring</em> [<em>La scienzasovvertita dal signor Eugenio Dühring</em>]: </p>
<p><em>The State will inevitably disappear, along with the classes. Society, which reorganizes production on the basis of the free association of all producers, on an equal footing, will relegate the government machine to the place that suits it: the museum of antiquities, alongside the spinning wheel and the bronze ax.</em></p>
<p> And Engels did not postpone the extinction of the State to a final phase of civilization, but presented it as strictly connected to the social revolution and inevitably deriving from it. In fact, he wrote in an article in 1847: </p>
<p><em>All socialists agree that the State and, with it, political authority will disappear as a result of the future social revolution; this means that public functions will lose their political character and will be transformed into simple administrative functions, of surveillance of local interests.</em></p>
<p> The State is identified by Marxists with the government, and before the former they place <em>a system in which the government of men gives way to the administration of things</em>, a system which, for Proudhon, constitutes anarchy. </p>
<p> Lenin in <em>State and Revolution</em> (1917) reconfirms the concept of the extinction of the State, by stating: <em>As for the suppression of the state as a goal, we are not at all detached from the anarchists</em>. </p>
<p> It is difficult to discriminate the bias from the tendency of the aforementioned affirmations, given that Marx and Engels had to struggle with the strong Proudhonian and Bakuninist currents and that Lenin, in 1917, saw the political need for an alliance between the Bolsheviks, the left revolutionary socialists, influenced by <em>maximalism</em>, and the anarchists. It seems certain to me, however, that while not excluding the bias in the manner and moment of those formulations, they responded to real tendencies. The affirmation of the extinction of the State is too intimately connected, too necessarily derivable from the Marxist conception of the nature and origins of the State, to be given an absolutely opportunistic character. </p>
<p> What is the State for Marx and Engels? It is a political power with the function of preserving social privileges and economic exploitation. </p>
<p> In the preface to the 3<sup>rd</sup> edition of Marx’s work, <em>The Civil War in France</em>, Engels wrote: </p>
<p><em>According to Hegelian philosophy, the State is</em> the realization of the Idea<em>, that is, in philosophical language, the kingdom of God on earth, the domain in which eternal truth and eternal justice are realized or must be realized. Hence that superstitious respect for the State and for everything that refers to the State, a respect that is all the more easily installed in the minds since one is accustomed from the cradle to imagining that the general affairs and interests of the whole society could not by regulated in a different way from what has been done up to now, that is, by the State and its suborders duly installed and functioning. And it is believed that one has already made really audacious progress when one has freed oneself from the belief in hereditary monarchy, to swear by the Democratic Republic. But in reality the State is nothing more than a machine of oppression of one class by another, whether in a democratic republic or in a monarchy, and the least that can be said about it is that it is a scourge that the proletariat inherits in its struggle to achieve its class rule, but of which it will have to, as the Commune did, and as far as possible, mitigate the most annoying effects, until the day when a generation grown up in a society of free and equal men will be able to get rid of any burden of government.</em></p>
<p> Marx (in <em>The Poverty of Philosophy</em>) says that, once the abolition of classes has been achieved, <em>there will no longer be real political power, since political power is precisely the official expression of the existing antagonism in bourgeois society.</em></p>
<p> That the state is reduced to <em>repressive</em> power over the proletariat and <em>conservative</em> power with respect to the bourgeoisie is a partial thesis, whether one examines the State anatomically or physiologically. In the State, the administration of things is associated with the government of men; and it is this second activity that ensures its permanence. Governments change. The State remains. And the State is not always in function of bourgeois power: as when it imposes laws, promotes reforms or creates institutions in contrast with the interests of the privileged classes and corresponging, instead, to the interests of the proletariat. Furthermore, the State is not only the gendarme, the judge, the minister. It is also the bureaucracy, as powerful as, and sometimes more, than the government. The fascist state in Italy today is something more complex than a police body and a curator of bourgeois interests, because it is linked by an umbilical cord to a set of political and corporate cadres with interests of their own that are not always, and never entirely, coincident with the class that brought fascism to power and of which the fascist dictatorship serves to maintain the power. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Against Sleep and Nightmare – Notes on Democracy
Wed, 17 Mar 2021 04:58:00 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Against Sleep and Nightmare<br><strong>Title</strong>: Notes on Democracy<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on March 12th, 2021, from<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> Democratic ideology essentially contains two sort of the illusions: </p>
<p> 1. The idea that under all circumstance the morally superior way of making decisions is having some sort of electoral participation by the majority. <br /> 2. The idea that the method of decision making is what distinguishes different sort of social system. </p>
<p> These illusions have many forms and are interrelated. Mainstream American democratic rhetoric justifies political decisions by the use of both elections and polls. It is &quot;very democratic&quot; in the sense that the passive choices of the majority can change the form that the American repression and exploitation take. </p>
<p> Worker’s self-management is a more obscure form of this illusion which claims that the changes in the way a factories’ decisions are made will change the form that an entire society will take. It’s basic position is summarized in the sticker that calls for workers to &quot;fire&quot; their bosses, and apparently continue production in the same old way. </p>
<p> It is important for revolutionaries to oppose both versions of democratic ideology. On one hand, after a revolution there certainly won’t be any reason to fixate on the process of reaching each decision. For example, one person could be assigned to decide a day’s delivery schedule in a communal warehouse without oppressing the other workers – who might prefer to spend their time walking on the beach. This dispatcher would have no coercive power over the other participants in the warehouse and deciding the schedule would not give her power that she could accumulate and exchanged for other things. For their own enjoyment, the worker might on the other hand want to collectively decide the menu of a communal kitchen even it was a less efficient use of time. </p>
<p> On the other hand, it’s important to realize that no scheme for managing society will by itself create a new society. Highly democratic, highly authoritarian and mixed schemes are now used to administer capitalism. The basic quality of this capitalism that the average person has little or no control of their daily mode of living. Wage labor dominates society. You must exchange your life to buy back your survival. Whether the average person under capitalism might somehow be able to make a large of decisions about which records they buy, which inmates serve long sentences, what the color the street lights are, etc. is irrelevant. </p>
<p> The community that escapes capitalism will involve people effectively controlling their process of living. This the individual and collective refusal of work, commodity production, exploitation etc. This certainly will require a large amount of collective decision making and a large amount of individual decision making. The transformation cannot be reduced to a set way of making decisions or a fixed plan of action. </p>
<p> The different modes of living are easier to describe using Marxian terminology sometimes because it speaks in terms of social processes rather than atomized individual actions. The economy is both a way people make decisions and a way people act. You can only see the real conditions of society by looking at the conditions of daily life – how a society’s mode of existence reproduces itself. This is summarized fairly well using the Marxian terms of political economy, spectacle, commodity etc. </p>
<p> All forms of democratic ideology appeal to a model of human behavior that implies each person is wholly separate social agent that only affects others in fixed, definable ways. This is the language of &quot;common sense&quot; in a world where people’s senses are controlled by capitalism. It defend the right, for example, for a man to shout cat-calls at woman who has previously been raped because that man’s actions are simply &quot;free speech&quot; not connected to any social action. </p>
<p> Communist positions see a social web which to not reducible to a fixed number to definable relations. Communists do not say that without capitalism we can guarantee that humans will create a human community. It says with capitalism, humans cannot create a human community. It sees that any movement for a human community will oppose capitalist social order and social relationships all along the way. The motivating force will not come with a communist blue-print but from the process of living of proletarians creating a new social relation. </p>
<div class=”amw-teaser-no-ellipsis”></div>

ziq – Burn the Bread Book
Tue, 16 Mar 2021 11:47:19 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: ziq<br><strong>Title</strong>: Burn the Bread Book<br><strong>Subtitle</strong>: Make Anarchy, Not More Ecocide &amp; Mass Extinction<br><strong>Date</strong>: December 2019<br><strong>Source</strong>:<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>The True Cost of Bread</div>
<p> For years I’ve watched a man drive his pick-up truck into the forest around me and cut down all the trees that aren’t legally protected. So, every tree that isn’t a pine or an oak. The moment a carob or olive or hawthorn or mastic or strawberry tree grows big enough to burn, he cuts it down and drags it away for firewood. He even fells trees I planted, while smiling and waving at me like he’s doing me a favor. I glare at him silently but don’t say a word, knowing he has the full power of the state behind him. </p>
<p> He uses the wood to fuel his traditional bakery which has several large outdoor ovens. The much-loved industrial product he produces is bread; a product that has rapidly replaced all the native food-bearing plants of the area as they’ve been cut down to make room for wheat fields. </p>
<p> The villagers are proud of the bakery because it attracts visitors from all over the island and thus creates further opportunities for them to earn profit. The local bureaucracy; the democratically-elected village council, gives the baker free reign to do as he pleases since so many livelihoods depend on his bakery. </p>
<p> Because the baker cuts everything down as soon as it reaches human height, the trees never get big enough to fruit, so they don’t spread their seeds and grow new trees. The forest slowly dwindles to nothing but pine trees and can no longer sustain most animal life. The climate dries, the soil erodes, the air grows stagnant and depleted of oxygen. All that’s left in the few remaining forests that haven’t been bulldozed to grow more wheat is a sterile pine desert. </p>
<p> The baker will soon no doubt lobby the village council to allow him to harvest the pine trees too, otherwise the all-important bakery will cease to be operational when he runs out of legal trees to fell. </p>
<p> In just a few years, all the fruits, nuts and berries that sustained the people in the area for millennia are wiped out and replaced with a consumer product that is made from a single grain crop. A thriving ecosystem has been replaced with a wheat monoculture that could collapse at any moment and take the lives of everyone it feeds with it. </p>
<p> It’s worth noting that the baker, like most people in my village, and in fact most people on the island, considers himself a communist. The village has a “communist party” clubhouse and they always elect “communist” local leaders and vote for “communist” politicians in the national elections. </p>
<p> Any anarchist worth their salt has no tolerance for these faux-communists, or “tankies” and their brand of collectivist-capitalism because they cling to money, states and rulers and really only embrace Stalinist politics because of the promise of cushy government jobs for them or their relatives. </p>
<p> The Stalinist politicians openly buy votes by promising jobs in the public service to their supporters. A job in the public service here is a guaranteed free ride for life for you and your family, with the salaries multiple times higher than private sector salaries and benefits out of the wazoo – including multiple pensions. They get a full pension for each gov sector they worked in, and the more connected civil servants are rotated through jobs in multiple sectors in the last few months leading up to their retirement to ensure the maximum pay-out possible. </p>
<p> I’m confident anyone reading this knows Stalinism is designed to enrich the bureaucrat class and give them complete control over the state’s citizens. No anarchist sees that shit as communism. But in a “real” communist society; an “anarcho-communist” society where money, state and class have been abolished, the local baker would presumably still bake that bread, and since it would be offered freely to everyone far and wide, he’d need to bake a lot more of it and thus need more wood. More forest would be razed to keep the bread production going. </p>
<p> Everyone living in the village and anyone passing through, and people in faraway cities will expect to have as much gourmet bread on their plates as they desire. More bakeries would need to pop up on the mountain as demand rises for delicious bread in the cities below, with the rural population working hard and doing their duty to feed the hungry urban population. </p>
<p> Over the years, I’ve put a lot of thought into envisioning how the workers seizing the means of production would end the environmental devastation this bread production brings to the mountain. I struggle to see any scenario where communism would stop the devastation being wrought on the ecosystem. The forests would continue to be razed to ensure production won’t slow down. </p>
<p> Free bread for everyone today means no bread (or any food) for anyone tomorrow as the top-soil washes away, the climate warms, the wildlife goes extinct, and the whole mountain rapidly turns to desert. It’s inevitable that soon even wheat will cease to grow in the fields surrounding the village. </p>
<p> Regardless of the economic system in place, the villagers being able to consume as many fresh loaves of baked bread as they can carry means all the forests in driving distance of the village are eviscerated, eventually all the fields become barren, the crops fail, and everyone starves. This is already well on its way to happening, and switching to a communist mode of production would do nothing to allay this inevitability. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Luigi Fabbri – The Anarchist Concept of the Revolution
Tue, 16 Mar 2021 00:55:12 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Luigi Fabbri<br><strong>Title</strong>: The Anarchist Concept of the Revolution<br><strong>Subtitle</strong>: Chapter from “Dittatura e Rivoluzione”<br><strong>Date</strong>: 1921<br><strong>Notes</strong>: Translation by João Black (March 2021)<br><strong>Source</strong>: Chapter X of “Dittatura e Rivoluzione”: <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a><br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> […] </p>
<p> The intolerance of many socialists, even revolutionary ones, in the face of anarchism largely depends on their absolute ignorance of the ideas, aims and methods of anarchists. </p>
<p> It is astounding to note how some of the most intelligent people, of a vast political and economic culture, among the socialists, when it comes to anarchy, can say nothing but the usual senseless clichés, spread by the worst bourgeois press: the most outlandish and defamatory statements, the most foolish interpretations. All the socialist knowledge of anarchism seems condensed in that old pamphlet, in which Plekanov, in 1893, vented his anti-anarchist bile, without any respect for truth and without any intellectual honesty;<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[1]</a> or in the well-known book by Lombroso on anarchists, which takes as true documents the reports of the police and of the directors of prisons, and, who knows why, puts among the anarchists people who for nine-tenths never dreamed of being one! </p>
<p> Countless socialist refutations of anarchism have appeared in newspapers, books and journals; but, with praiseworthy exceptions, they almost always refuted ideas that were not at all anarchist, but attributed to anarchists out of either ignorance or polemic artifice. Especially on the concept of revolution, pretended anarchist theories have been put into circulation that were so extravagant as to lead one to doubt the good faith of those enunciating them. How much ink was scattered to demonstrate to the “deluded anarchists” that the revolution is not made with stones, with old rifles or with some revolvers, that barricades no longer correspond to the needs of today’s struggle! that isolated and sudden movements are not enough! that individual attacks alone do not make the revolution! that riot is one thing and revolution is another!… And so on, with far-fetched discoveries of a similar kind ― ignoring, or pretending to ignore, that anarchists have the most exact concept of revolution, and at the same time most practical, according to the etymological, traditional and historical meaning of the word. </p>
<p> Revolution, in political and social language ― and also in popular language ― is a general movement through which a people or a class, breaking out of legality and overthrowing the existing institutions, breaking the lion pact [<em>patto leonino</em>] imposed by the rulers on the ruled classes, with a more or less long series of insurrections, revolts, riots, attacks and struggles of all kinds, definitively overthrows the political and social regime to which, until then, they were subjected, and establishes a new order. </p>
<p> The overthrow of a regime usually takes place in a relatively short time: a few days for the revolution of July 1830 which in France replaced one dynasty for another; a little more than one year for the Italian revolution of 1848; six or seven years for the French revolution of 1789; a dozen years for the English revolution of the mid-seventeenth century. The revolution, that is, the <em>de facto</em> demolition of a pre-existing political and social regime, is essentially the conclusion of an earlier evolution, which translates into material reality, violently breaking up the social forms and the political shell no longer able to contain it. It ends with the return to a normal state, when the struggle has ceased, whether the victory allows the revolution to establish a new regime, or whether its partial or total defeat restores part or all of the old one, giving rise to the counter-revolution. </p>
<p> The main feature, by which it can be said that the revolution has begun, is the exit from legality, the breaking of the state equilibrium and discipline, the unpunished and victorious action of the square against the law. Before a specific and decisive fact of this kind, there is still no revolution. There can be a revolutionary state of mind, a revolutionary preparation, a condition of things more or less favorable to revolution; there may be more or less fortunate episodes of revolt, insurrectional attempts, violent or non-violent strikes, even bloody demonstrations, attacks, etc. But as long as the force remains with the old law and the old power, we have not yet entered the revolution. </p>
<p> The struggle against the state, armed defender of the regime, is therefore the <em>sine qua non</em> condition of the revolution, which tends to limit the power of the state as much as possible and to develop the spirit of freedom, to push the people, the subjects of the day before, the exploited and the oppressed, to the maximum possible limit, to the use of all individual and collective freedoms. In the exercise of freedom, not constrained by laws and governments, lies the health of every revolution, the guarantee that it will not be limited or arrested in its progress, its best safeguard against internal and external attempts to throttle it. </p>
<div class=”center”>
<p> * * * </p>
<p> Some tell us: «We understand that, as anarchists, being opposed to any idea of ​​government, you oppose the dictatorship which is its most authoritarian expression; but it is not a question of proposing it as an aim, but rather as a means, albeit unpleasant but necessary, just as violence is a necessary but unpleasant means, during the provisional revolutionary period, necessary to overcome bourgeois resistance and counterattacks». </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Anarcho-Syndicalist Initiative from Romania – Interview with the Federation of Anarchists in Moldova
Mon, 15 Mar 2021 22:09:15 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Anarcho-Syndicalist Initiative from Romania<br><strong>Title</strong>: Interview with the Federation of Anarchists in Moldova<br><strong>Date</strong>: October 20, 2012<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 15<sup>th</sup> March 2021 from <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a><br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p><strong>IASR:</strong> What is FAM (Federation of Anarchists in Moldova)? </p>
<p><strong>FAM:</strong> Federation of Anarchists in Moldova emerged from the desire to create an anarchist coordination and information center. Currently, our main priority is to provide information. </p>
<p><strong>IASR:</strong> There is an anarchist movement in Moldova? </p>
<p><strong>FAM:</strong> As for now, the anarchist movement in Moldova is at the beginning. That is why we do not have such an intense activity which we can observe in Romania and Ukraine. We must start from the beginning due to the historical context: the anarchist movement in Moldova was permanently part of the Russian anarchist movement, and then, briefly, part of the Romanian anarchist movement, afterwards being completely destroyed during the Soviet period. </p>
<p><strong>IASR:</strong> What is the situation of the anarchists in Moldova? Are anarchists repressed? </p>
<p><strong>FAM:</strong> As I mentioned before, we start our history from scratch. </p>
<p><strong>IASR</strong>: In Romania, the Communists of the Stalinist type disappeared from the political scene, while the Romanian Communist Party was outlawed. On the other hand, in Moldova they were in government and enjoy considerable support. What is the relationship of the anarchists with the PCRM? Is there direct hostility or cordial relations?<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[1]</a></p>
<p><strong>FAM:</strong> I should mention that PCRM is not an orthodox communist party (of the Marxist, Stalinist or Leninist type); it’s a party that uses the symbols of the Soviet Communists and the word “communism” in its name. In fact, it’s an oligarchic party. This is why we do not build relations with the Communist Party. But we cannot ignore the fact that the PCRM nowadays, has considerable support. The people that support the PCRM are deceived since the Soviet period, they are dogmatic. Our goal is to show them the truth. </p>
<p><strong>IASR:</strong> Was there an anarchist participation within the protests of 2009? What is the position of the Moldovan anarchists in connection with the protests?<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[2]</a></p>
<p><strong>FAM:</strong> It’s a very interesting question. In connection with the protests of April 7, 2009, we participated individually. Was April 7<sup>th</sup> a coup d’état, as suggested by the PCRM? Maybe, maybe not. Maybe it was an attempt by the PCRM to escape from responsibility before the arrival of the global financial crisis, as stated by those who are in power. It can be. We are confident that on April 7, 2009, in the Republic of Moldova, the so called communists from the state power were replaced with the liberals. And taking into account the interests of the workers, we can notice that the current “revolutionary” government is in fact the Liberal government, and this is no different from any liberal government in the world. We have the same so-called liberal reforms that the government implements under the strict guidance of the IMF and we have the corresponding results: worsening social conditions of life for workers. </p>
<p><strong>IASR:</strong> What is the opinion of the Moldovan anarchists on the “unionist” issue?<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[3]</a></p>
<p><strong>FAM:</strong> The question is not simple. But still, we believe that the “unionist” issue is based on Romanian nationalism. At the “union marches” those participating are the “legionaries”, “Iron Guard”, “Action 2012”. To me, it seems that in Romania these organizations are not as active as in Moldova. But this is not all the truth; the activity of the nationalists stimulates the activity among Russian chauvinists (more correctly Russophiles) and so-called “patriots”. </p>
<p><strong>IASR:</strong> Thank you very much for the interview. </p>
<p><strong>FAM:</strong> You’re welcome. </p>
<p class=”fnline”><a class=”footnotebody” href=”#”>[1]</a> PCRM — Party of Communists of the Republic of Moldova, is a communist party in Moldova, led by Vladimir Voronin. It is the only communist party to have held a majority in government in the post-Soviet states.The PCRM claims to be the lawful successor and heir of the Communist Party of [Soviet] Moldavia. </p>
<p class=”fnline”><a class=”footnotebody” href=”#”>[2]</a> The 2009 civil unrest in Moldova began on April 7, 2009, in major cities of Moldova (including the capital Chişinău and Bălţi) before the results of the 2009 Moldovan parliamentary election were announced. The demonstrators claimed that the elections, which saw the governing Party of Communists of the Republic of Moldova (PCRM) win a majority of seats, were fraudulent, and alternatively demanded a recount, a new election, or resignation of the government. </p>
<p class=”fnline”><a class=”footnotebody” href=”#”>[3]</a> The “unionist” issue refers to the union of Romania and Moldova (known in Romania as “Bessarabia”). The Principality of Moldavia was annexed by the Russian Empire, then incorporated into Romania and eventually annexed again by the emerging USSR. </p>
<div class=”amw-teaser-no-ellipsis”></div>

Anarcho-Syndicalist Initiative from Romania – What is the Anarcho-Syndicalist Initiative from Romania?
Mon, 15 Mar 2021 22:05:54 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Anarcho-Syndicalist Initiative from Romania<br><strong>Title</strong>: What is the Anarcho-Syndicalist Initiative from Romania?<br><strong>Date</strong>: February 25, 2013<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 15<sup>th</sup> March 2021 from <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a><br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>What is the Anarcho-Syndicalist Initiative from Romania?</div>
<p> The Anarcho-Syndicalist Initiative from Romania is an anarchist project, more accurately – an anarcho-syndicalist project, initiated in order to promote the principles of revolutionary syndicalism. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Which are our objectives?</div>
<p> Our objectives are to initiate a criticism of the current labor unions that are operating on the labour market and which are run in an undemocratic manner, to make known libertarian ideas, to solidarize with the working class and other oppressed social groups under the current system and to contribute for the formation of an anarcho-syndicalist movement in Romania. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>What exactly is A.S.I.R. and in what direction does it tend to develop ?</div>
<p> Currently we try to promote our project publishing a newsletter. This newsletter has the role of making our position clear about the syndicalist movement, to define , for those interested, the principles that form the basis of our initiative and to indicate the model of social and economical organization according to libertarian principles. </p>
<p> The A.S.I.R. collective has also into account the participation at social actions in order to assure an anarchist presence among syndicalists at protests and marches, among minorities of any kind that claim a proper status in society and, generally, wherever there are to be found actions that intend to produce changes in order to emancipate the society form the tyranny of the state , of capitalism or religion. </p>
<p> The Anarcho-Syndicalist Initiative tends to be a part of the International Workers Association, with whose statutes and principles we identify ourselves. This adhesion is mostly due to the awareness and importance of international solidarity. We believe that joining such an organization should contribute to a better assimilation of ideas among members of A.S.I.R. that will find a source of inspiration from the long tradition of the existence of this organization. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>What is the motivation for such a project and what does it tend to accomplish?</div>
<p> Today’s society is divided among social classes, between those who dominate and those who are dominated. Starting from the conviction that the privileges of some are the source of abuse and injustice, we identify wherever there is hierarchy and authority – the source of evil in the society in which we live. </p>
<p> These forms of illegitimate social existence inherently are those that lead our destinies. </p>
<p> Thus the State, capitalism and religion – should be subject of scrutiny in order to certify if the authority exercised by them meets the conditions that should be established as the basis of our society. </p>
<p> We believe that more than often it does not and their actions turn against all of us, our history is but a long train of abuses and usurpation’s, made by those endowed with authority. </p>
<p> Thus the State is in charge of controlling the education, of inoculating obedience in order to conserve power and of promoting unhindered the interests of the ruling class, capitalism is responsible for creating an unequal and unjust economical society , religion is accountable for imposing their dogmas as being absolute truths and to make the social misery to be ignored. </p>
<p> All this make possible the arbitrary decisions made by some against others, directly or indirectly. </p>
<p> Given the above, we are fighting for a society organized horizontally, based on the non-hierarchical principle , composed of a network of voluntary associations, coordinated by direct democracy, that cooperate among themselves in accordance with the principles of libertarian communism. </p>
<p> In this sense, we consider anarcho-syndicalism the best suited model of organization, beginning from the workplace where we have the power to exchange ideas, where we can make us heard and where we can act and continuing into other realms of social networking. </p>
<div class=”amw-teaser-no-ellipsis”></div>

Anarcho-Syndicalist Initiative from Romania – MASA interviewed by IASR
Mon, 15 Mar 2021 22:03:17 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Anarcho-Syndicalist Initiative from Romania<br><strong>Title</strong>: MASA interviewed by IASR<br><strong>Date</strong>: September 23, 2012<br><strong>Notes</strong>: IASR (Anarcho-Syndicalist Initiative from Romania) interviews MASA (The Network of Anarcho-syndicalists) in Croatia.<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 15<sup>th</sup> March 2021 from <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a><br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p><strong>IASR:</strong> What is MASA? </p>
<p> MASA is a network of propaganda and militant/activist groups (con)federated across Croatia which politically most strongly identifies with the anarcho-syndicalist tendency in the anarchist movement and with the principles of revolutionary syndicalism of the IWA. This means that members of MASA consider class struggle anarchism their starting point and specifically advocate the creation of ‘syndicates’ or ‘class organizations’ as the nuclei of struggle wherever class conflicts occur — especially in workplaces, but not always reduced to them. Thus, MASA members have also participated in student struggles, protests against social cuts, imperialism, nationalism, parliamentary democracy etc. Despite wanting to and struggling in the long term for the abolishment of the capital-labor relation and other forms of social oppression and advocating their replacement with ‘libertarian communism’, it is clear that no organization could sustain its everyday activity and relevance only through such aims. Therefore, according to its statute, the more grounded aims of MASA are “building an anarcho-syndicalist movement in Croatia, establishing strong connections with other non-hierarchical organizations based on class struggle, informing the public about anarcho-syndicalist (or anarchist and libertarian communist) alternatives regarding the management of the processes of production and distribution and also about the direct democratic management of society and community life”. Also, one of our aims is the “creation of a syndicalist confederation based on anarchist principles.” </p>
<p> However, MASA, as has already been mentioned, is also an organization of militants/activists coming from a working class background, mainly young people, who are, like the rest of the world, faced with unemployment and live in precarious conditions, forming the ‘reserve army’ of the working class. As a part of the working class and through our organization, we engage in class and social struggles occurring in our communities; where there are none, we try to initiate them. In both cases we advocate and apply direct democratic methods of organizing, always striving to turn the defensive struggles of the working class into victories, victories into new demands for redistribution and expropriation, thus bringing the struggles closer towards the desired social relationships and society. </p>
<p> Because we are convinced that social change can come only through the class struggle of the working class and its organizations, it is very important for us to be present among them and to struggle together even if we do not necessarily agree with the immediate aims of their (often reformist and defensive) demands. We believe that many anarchists today are mistaken when and if they immediately reject such reformist struggles. To paraphrase Errico Malatesta, we believe that we should always be on the side of the people. When they demand nothing, we should try to make them demand something and by doing so, by being with the people, spread the influence of anarchist ideas among them and try to radicalize them and their demands. If we do not do so, we risk isolation from them, thus making anarchist ideas marginal and creating an opportunity for authoritarian organizations to spread their influence and assume control of the struggles. </p>
<p><strong>IASR:</strong> How and when was MASA founded? </p>
<p> MASA was founded in February 2008 in Zadar. Its foundation came about rather spontaneously at the “First national meeting of anarcho-syndicalists ”, which was initiated by local anarcho-syndicalists and libertarian communists. The meeting was initially intended to be a forum for interested people to exchange their ideas and experiences and also discuss the possibility of coordinated action among them. The initiators of this meeting did not want to set any strict agenda for the gathering, but asked the participants to create the program commonly. Despite their own wishes and basing their decision on past experiences, the initiators did not want to put forward the idea that an organization should be formed. Since the last few attempts proved to be unsuccessful, they concluded that if the circumstances do not allow for such a project, it cannot be brought about forcefully. Comrades from the General Secretariat of the IWA (based in Belgrade at the time) were also invited to participate and present the activities of the IWA. </p>
<p> However, when all the interested people gathered there, a strong wish for the formation of a national anarcho-syndicalist organization was expressed and the participants voted on the formation of MASA. In short, this was the beginning of MASA. However, until April 2008, MASA existed only informally. It was then that the First National Congress of MASA was held in Zagreb, where we chose the Coordination and the delegates for the writing of our Statute. Thus, MASA was formally formed in April 2008. Today, MASA members are spread out across Croatia and MASA’s network is based on three local groups (Zagreb, Rijeka, Split) and nine local contacts (cities and towns where we have less than three members, the number we take as a base for the formation of local groups). </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Okty Budiati – Anti-Identity and Self Defense
Mon, 15 Mar 2021 04:57:59 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Okty Budiati<br><strong>Title</strong>: Anti-Identity and Self Defense<br><strong>Subtitle</strong>: ‘my home is my broken heart'<br><strong>Date</strong>: 12/03/2021<br><strong>Source</strong>: The author and translating collective.<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> &quot;<em>Those who plead their cause in the absence of an opponent can invent to their heart’s content, can pontificate without taking into account the opposite point of view and keep the best arguments for themselves, for aggressors are always quick to attack those who have no means of defense.</em>&quot; (Christine de Pizan) – Then how am I supposed to start <em>all of this</em> while the meaning is distorted and stuck right in the shimmer of <em>Ken Dedes'</em> calf!<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[1]</a></p>
<p> My birth became a reality for life’s misfortunes. Where my existence –as a way of anarchy on the path back to the Self– becomes a form of the complexity of a formless world. I’m some kind of <em>trapezoid</em> replica. The fusion of <em>Hanacaraka</em><a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[2]</a> is filled with question marks on life’s incomprehension about the fragility of the increasingly fragile torso cliffs<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[3]</a>. <em>Is there a louder voice besides that of the madness of a child looking for her mother when the only place for them is the nonsense of national identity and gender?</em></p>
<p> &quot;<em>From childhood’s hour I have not been <br />As others were I have not seen <br />As others saw I could not bring <br />My passions from a common spring <br />From the same source I have not taken <br />My sorrow I could not awaken <br />My heart to joy at the same tone <br />And all I lov’d, I lov’d alone</em>&quot; <br />(Edgar Allan Poe on ALONE) </p>
<p> I still question three things that torment my breath the most: <br /><em>What is human?</em><a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[4]</a><br /><em>What is individual freedom?</em><a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[5]</a><br /><em>What is acceptance of war and love?</em></p>
<p> In reality, I have to continue to struggle to accept myself as a creature with an ‘<em>attachment disorder</em>’ and undergo <em>brainspotting</em> therapy, which is so emotionally draining. This labyrinth patents me as an accursed human whilst humans, with their red eyes and words, persist in killing me for their victory feast. The individualist anarchist again has to stand on the brink of defeat, even within anarchist circles. </p>
<p><em>I’m estranged from childhood memories. I’m knocked out of family memories. I was manipulated from household memories. What kind of world is this?! Isn’t the cult of atonement enough for the barbarity of the aristocratic past sins? When this sadness-grief is my way home.</em></p>
<p> At one point, decades ago, between me and Batubulan<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[6]</a>, Max Stirner colored my life like a new rainbow: &quot;<em>I only have been the unhuman, am it now no longer, but am the unique, yes, to your loathing, the egoistic; yet not the egoistic as it lets itself be measured by the human, humane, and unselfish, but the egoistic as the unique.</em>&quot; I thought back to Blavatsky; &quot;<em>It is an occult law moreover, that no man can rise superior to his individual failings without lifting, be it ever so little, the whole body of which he is an integral part. In the same way no one can sin, nor suffer the effects of sin, alone. In reality, there is no such thing as separateness and the nearest approach to that selfish state which the laws of life permit is in the intent or motive.</em>&quot; </p>
<p> After hanging myself at the end of the year in a melting romance, I was as empty as the early world between <em>Kebyar Duduk</em> and <em>Bedhaya Ketawang</em><a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[7]</a>. The <em>psychosomatic</em> breakdown of ballerinas created for grim darkness. I was knocked, crushed and squashed – &quot;<em>in space no one can hear you scream; and in a black hole, no one can see you disappear.</em>&quot; (Stephen Hawking) </p>
<br />I miss dance and poetry….<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[8]</a></p>
<br /> Jakarta, February 2021 </p>
<p class=”fnline”><a class=”footnotebody” href=”#”>[1]</a> Ken Dedes is an historical queen frequently depicted in sitting meditation, with shining calves. The author’s use of this imagery conveys the superstitious nature of common people.<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>{1}</a></p>
<p class=”fnline”><a class=”footnotebody” href=”#”>[2]</a> Hanacaraka is a Javanese script used for writing a number of languages. </p>
<p class=”fnline”><a class=”footnotebody” href=”#”>[3]</a> Torso cliffs invokes the ribcage and breath, hanacaraka, vibration, and how all of these relate to mental health. </p>
<p class=”fnline”><a class=”footnotebody” href=”#”>[4]</a> During translation, when asked about the phrasing of this question, the author spoke briefly on a text found in &quot;Species Being and other stories&quot; by Frere Dupont. </p>
<p class=”fnline”><a class=”footnotebody” href=”#”>[5]</a> The author’s concern is with feudalism in Indonesia and Benjamin Tucker’s ideas on liberty of socialism. </p>
<p class=”fnline”><a class=”footnotebody” href=”#”>[6]</a> Batabulan is a village in Gianyar, Bali, where the author learned the traditional Balinese dance; Batabulan has a complicated regional past, involving first unification and then splitting of Java and Bali, and an erasure of history. </p>
<p class=”fnline”><a class=”footnotebody” href=”#”>[7]</a> The author, a professional ballerina, was banned from performing the traditional dance because she is too &quot;Western&quot; and not &quot;Eastern&quot; enough.<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>{2}</a><a class=”footnote” href=”#”>{3}</a></p>
<p class=”fnline”><a class=”footnotebody” href=”#”>[8]</a> The author has been designated a radical and so is banned from performing in Indonesia. </p>
<p class=”secondary-fnline”><a class=”footnotebody” href=”#”>{1}</a> Ken Dedes’s myths: <br /><a class=”text-amuse-link text-amuse-is-single-link” href=””></a><br /><a class=”text-amuse-link text-amuse-is-single-link” href=””></a></p>
<p class=”secondary-fnline”><a class=”footnotebody” href=”#”>{2}</a> KEBYAR DUDUK Traditional Balinese Dance: <br /><a class=”text-amuse-link text-amuse-is-single-link” href=””></a><br /><a class=”text-amuse-link text-amuse-is-single-link” href=””></a></p>
<p class=”secondary-fnline”><a class=”footnotebody” href=”#”>{3}</a> BEDHAYA KETAWANG both based on GENDING BEDHAYA KETAWANG AGENG (lyrics), Javanese Classical Dance: <br /><a class=”text-amuse-link text-amuse-is-single-link” href=”″></a><br /><a class=”text-amuse-link text-amuse-is-single-link” href=”″></a></p>
<div class=”amw-teaser-no-ellipsis”></div>

Anonymous – The Difference Between “Just Coping” & “Not Coping At All”
Mon, 15 Mar 2021 04:57:59 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Anonymous<br><strong>Title</strong>: The Difference Between “Just Coping” &amp; “Not Coping At All”<br><strong>Date</strong>: 2020<br><strong>Notes</strong>: Submitted for UK-based anarchist zine Return Fire vol.6 chap.2 (Winter 2020-2021) To read the articles referenced throughout this text in [square brackets], PDFs of Return Fire and related publications can be read, downloaded and printed by visiting or emailing<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p><em>[ed. – Come the capacity, come the crisis. Whatever else can be said about the world-wide restrictions that a huge part of the global population has been subject to for as much as a year now, it seems clear that such restrictions can only be viable due to the extensive system of cybernetics (see the supplement to</em> <em><strong>Return Fire vol.3; Caught in the Net</strong></em><em>) that the current form of capitalism has been shifting its weight upon. The nexus of techno-sciences and research projects bringing life to the supposed Fourth (and even Fifth) Industrial Revolutions is being announced, by both its advocates and its critics, as seizing the greatest leap forward imaginable under the guise of problem-solving for a population terrified by the invisible virus. But where does the hype over the dystopian surveillence, profit-harvesting and stupefication capacities actually meet with their ability to solve the problems facing the system?</em></p>
<p><em>Here we publish words received in late autumn from a correspondent, revising their predictions that they made in the grip of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic as it was announced here in Britain in early spring. To be clear, this does not attempt to brush such concerns aside: though elites don’t seem seriously worried about revolution, the most intelligent capitalists see the need for what’s described below as a “new Fordism” to save their murderous system (and for those who associate the automobile magnate who gave that era its name with a more benign and socially-inclusive phase, let’s remember he wasn’t a saviour but efficient exploiter and Nazi sympathiser whose improved productivity gave rise to some of the more famous atrocities of the 20th century – see <strong>Return Fire vol.5 pg98</strong>). However, this piece reminds us of the nuanced relation between capitalists and the State; though clearly entities joined at the hip since capitalism was first widely adopted – as a State-subsidised activity on terrains and populations captured by the State – they do not always move as a unified block.</em></p>
<p><em>We’re tired of being treated like ‘conspiracy theorists’ (even by those who we once thought understood that the State does not exist to keep us safe…) when we decry the unprecedented sociocidal policies of the lockdown regime, but we’re also tired of premature claims that what we are facing is already a unified totalitarianism or fascism in the outmoded 20th century sense. Certain States – the US, for example – clearly passed up opportunities to seize more centralised executive power during the outbreak but instead allowed systematically-oppressed parts of the population to sicken and die off, compared to the centralised deployment of National Guard and other federal agencies during the uprising later in 2020 (see <strong>The Siege of the Third Precinct in Minneapolis</strong>). Clearly there are more complicated dynamics and histories at play. Our reading of this piece highlights the drastic need to intensify existing networks of mutual aid (decontaminated of the political appropriation of the term that the last 12 months have seen rise to) so as to rely on each other and not the system as – in symphony – we try to weaken and eventually bring it down with our attacks, blockades and subversion.]</em></p>
<p> My first reaction to lockdown was, this is it, the state will not give up the power it’s grabbed, as that’s the pattern from 9/11 and so on. But, we do have precedent for states going hardcore authoritarian (military rule etc.) then &quot;democratising&quot;, such as when Britain later repealed some of the Second World War emergency restriction crap <em>[ed. – introduced by the leftist Labour Party immediately upon entering government, awarding themselves “full power to control all persons and property”]</em>. In retrospect it seems the scenarios I was expecting to unfold were a little over-pessimistic; I hope I’m not tempting fate here. I think there’s some kind of dynamic between the capitalists and the state where the capitalists are sometimes fine with repression (especially to keep power) but other times are worried the state is getting too big a share of the pie or interfering with their own interests. The trouble is, this won’t happen if the measures are part of the new regime of accumulation (cybernetic control as profit) or if the crisis is so deep that the capitalists are panicky and more afraid of revolution. </p>
<p> It’s hard to see what the agenda is now – if the plan was to shock us with lockdown then introduce a less drastic &quot;new normal&quot; which people will celebrate even though it’s worse than the &quot;old normal&quot;, if it was a trial-run to experiment how people would respond to counterinsurgency measures <em>[ed. – see</em> <em><strong>Return Fire vol.3 pg5</strong></em><em>]</em> and what systemic strains there’d be, or if it was just a massive fuck-up coming from too much securitisation (i.e., the impulse to use pigs to solve medical problems) combined with legitimation-by-panic. </p>
<p> What I think happened later is that cracks started to show in the lockdowns, &quot;compliance&quot; went down and political resistance started to recompose. People stopped long-running movements for a month or so, then started again (in Chile, Lebanon, Hong Kong). The <em>banlieues</em> <em>[ed. – French suburban ghettoes, often predominantly housing racialised people from former colonies]</em> exploded, then Mayday was marked in several countries, with very successful bike demos in Slovenia and flash-mob actions in Germany. Then there was the big anti-lockdown protests (US, Germany, Brazil) – my impression from articles and people I know is that they’re organised by conspiracy theorists and libertarian rightists, pick up loads of fascists, but also attract anarcho/leftie types, Bernie Sanders voters, black people fed-up of pig stops and so on <em>[ed. – see</em> <em><strong>How the Left is Handing Over Protest to Fascism</strong></em><em>]</em>. There’s also (ironically) a left-wing conspiracy theory going around which has the Koch brothers as masterminds behind the anti-lockdown protests and government back-to-work programs… worryingly similar to how the right uses George Soros, though nobody who’s into it seems to see the parallel. Although it might be challenging for some to admit, I think that these protests paved the way for the anti-police rebellions after the murder of George Floyd <em>[ed. – see</em> <em><strong>The Siege of the Third Precinct in Minneapolis</strong></em><em>]</em> by showing that street-level resistance was still possible. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

ASBO interview with London ABC – Everything Is Sanitised, But We Are Constantly Wringing Our Tired Hands
Mon, 15 Mar 2021 04:57:59 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: ASBO interview with London ABC<br><strong>Title</strong>: Everything Is Sanitised, But We Are Constantly Wringing Our Tired Hands<br><strong>Date</strong>: May 2020<br><strong>Notes</strong>: This version published in UK-based anarchist zine Return Fire vol.6 chap.2 (Winter 2020-2021) To read the articles referenced throughout this text in [square brackets], PDFs of Return Fire and related publications can be read, downloaded and printed by visiting or emailing<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on July 15th 2020 from<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p><em>[ed. – An interview taken from the website of the Anarchist Black Cross (ABC) prisoner support group in London, along with their introductory note. This was conducted off the back of a text brought out after the 2019 debacle of many UK anarchists advocating voting for Labour (and even canvassing for them) under then-leader Jeremy Corbyn, fulfilling the tragic role that has dogged certain anarchist tendencies of drone for the Left that will later imprison them.</em></p>
<p><em>It touches on many topics related to the current pandemic, but first a word on the analogies with the prison system so richly enumerated below. Though the interviewee might object to a more thoughtless use of the term ‘Prison Island’ for the UK, not just here but across much of the world a shift has already been underway for decades in which the population (with various degrees of intensity, and certainly not as equivalent to actual prisoners) are subject to increasing control – taking over from discipline, Michel Foucault’s “work begun elsewhere, which the whole of society pursues on each individual through innumerable mechanisms”, as the paradigm for governance – that blurs the distinctions between ‘inside’ and ‘outside’ those walls despite our many (largely illusory) ‘freedoms’. COVID-19 has shown rapidly how contingent those so-called freedoms were to the State that could decide to enforce their denial; tellingly, the UK government description of certain lockdown restrictions as ‘enhanced’ as opposed to ‘basic’ is language directly from UK prisoners’ allocated status and ‘privileges’.</em></p>
<p><em>Another of the themes excellently addressed below is that of ‘abolition’ of the prison system; a stance that is so ultimately un-radical that it has comfortably fit into the mouths even of prison directors themselves in recent years. It feels woefully ironic that the term (a triumphalist direct reference to the liberation struggle of African-descended slaves in North America, when their fight is clearly far from over) coexists in the United States, the largest exporter of abolitionist discourse, with the notorious exemption of prisoners from the ban on slavery: leading us to a present described in ‘Learning from Ferguson’ as pairing “precarious labor market on the outside and booming prison industries on the inside”.</em></p>
<p><em>Here in Britain too the ‘abolitionist’ term has tainted history, without the sometimes-militancy (if otherwise problematic) of the movement of white abolitionists on the other side of the Atlantic: basically, it was adopted by statesmen concerned overall with how to keep chattel slaves in the Caribbean colonies working (under the same masters) once “emancipated”, so as the continue along the supposed path of civilisation they had been prescribed before they could allegedly be seen as human. There was a large overlap with the utilitarian thinkers of the time (of whom, Jeremy Bentham is remembered more for his ‘Panopticon’ contribution to prison surveillance architecture than for his philanthropic projects; see <strong>Return Fire vol.4 pg9</strong>), who, like Benjamin Franklin had, complained of the terrible “inefficiency” of slavery as a productive system compared to wage labour that could compete better in the sugar plantations compared to the slaves in Cuba, Brazil, or the United States. In public statescrafters wore the benevolent and enlightened face of abolition; in confidential colonial office memos, those such as Sir James Stephen (architect of Britain’s 1833 Slavery Abolition Act) assured elites that “the Planter [will incur] no other loss than that of finding his whips, stocks and manacles deprived of their use &amp; value”. Some of the same abolitionists were at the same time already praising Britain’s surging complex of prisons, asylums and workhouses: for their morally ‘civilising’ lower-class influence, of course…</em></p>
<p><em>Well before the current hellish US racial nightmare of imprisonment, the British Empire (which Stephen virtually ruled 1789 – 1847) shipped Indian convict-slaves to prison islands; today, recent UK governments have proposed jointly building prisons they could deport to with governments of Nigeria (where building a maximum security prison was one of the last programs of the colonial regime in the 1950s before independence – the first British-built prison being burned down in 1882 by anti-colonial rebels before being rebuilt) and Jamaica (which recently introduced the requirement of biometric driving licenses). Cynically, here in the UK the ‘Track and Trace’ scheme was initially managed by NHSX (the tech wing of the National Health Service that anarchists justified voting to ‘save’) precisely due to the public’s trust in the institution, which from the start (before handing over the scheme to Google, Apple, et al.) linked it to the eventual creation of biometric immunity passports.</em></p>
<p><em>COVID-19 digital solutions marketed by a rising number of firms are also, as with Trust Stamp (a biometric digital identity program brought to &quot;remote, low-income communities&quot; in West Africa in a private-public partnership together with and Mastercard and the Bill Gates-backed vaccine cartel GAVI), offered explicitly to interested parties in prison administrations to provide probation with contactless identification &quot;without making them pay for the expensive ankle bracelets that monitor their every move&quot;. Again, drawing together a nexus of remote (or even, via artificial intelligence, predictive) policing, bio-security and control over access, and the planned elimination of cash; in short, the impossible Panoptican fantasy of a totally controlled and transparent society.</em></p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Andy Robinson – Hakim Bey
Mon, 15 Mar 2021 04:57:59 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Andy Robinson<br><strong>Title</strong>: Hakim Bey<br><strong>Subtitle</strong>: Articles on Hakim Bey from Ceasefire Magazine<br><strong>Date</strong>: October 28, 2017 – November 13, 2019<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on October 28, 2020 from<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>An Introduction</div>
<p> Hakim Bey is a quasi-fictional anarchist theorist best know for his concept of the Temporary Autonomous Zone (TAZ). He has also formulated a type of post-left anarchist theory known as immediatism. Bey is widely regarded as a pseudonym for the writer and comparative religion specialist Peter Lamborn Wilson. The works of Bey and Wilson can be found and read for free at a number of websites. Stemming from anarchism, New Age spirituality and the 60s counterculture, Bey’s work provides one of the most astute recent theories of alienation and capitalism to be found anywhere today. However his work is also extremely controversial, for reasons that will be discussed in detail in the last parts of the series. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Who is Hakim Bey?</div>
<p> On one level, the relationship between Bey and Wilson is clear: they are the same person. But on another level, it is unclear. Bey may simply be a pseudonym, or an alter ego. For example, Simon Sellars argues that Hakim Bey is not just a pseudonym, but a fictional character. He cites as evidence the fictionalised biography of Bey provided in <em>TAZ</em>. Similarly, Greer suggests that Bey was originally a deliberate fiction. The identity of Wilson, Bey, and the Association for Ontological Anarchy was a closely guarded secret. When Bey appeared in a video about TAZ, he is presented in a blurred form, using psychedelic colours and patterns. In this series, I shall assume for sake of simplicity that Bey and Wilson are the same person, although there are noticeable differences in style. </p>
<p> The invented name ‘Hakim Bey’ has two probable sources. Hakim was a Fatimid caliph admired by Wilson for his heterodoxy. Bey is a common title given in the Moorish Science movement to which Wilson is loosely affiliated. Given Wilson’s hostility to the Internet, connotations of ‘hacking’ are probably unintentional. Bey’s work is described by Simon Sellars as ‘a potent brew of mysticism, historical narratives, autonomous Marxist politics and French critical theory’. He explicitly sees himself as continuing the struggle waged by Situationism and Italian <em>autonomia</em>. However, he rejects the class-struggle orientation central to these traditions. Instead, he theorises revolution in terms of the achievement of altered states of consciousness, in struggle against the dominant ‘Spectacular’, ‘consensus’ or ‘media trance’ worldview. </p>
<p> In Knight’s biography, Wilson is portrayed as a former hippy and drug-user who converted to Sufi Islam during a period of exile in Iran. He started out as a so-called ‘white Negro’ jazz fan and marijuana smoker. He was later involved with the Moorish Orthodox Church, a mainly-white splinter from the black-led Moorish Science Temple. He was also involved with the LSD-fuelled religous activities of Timothy Leary. When Leary’s activities were criminalised, and with a climate of repression and the Vietnam draft hanging over his head, Wilson fled the country. He claims that he intended permanent exile. He journeyed in Bengal, Assam, Balochistan, northwest Pakistan, and Afghanistan. He eventually settled in Iran, referred to the Iranian Sufis by an Indian Sufi master. After studying with a number of masters, he became affiliated with the Maryamiyya. This was a Sufi order founded by western scholars connected to the Iranian monarchy. Wilson was editor of the sect’s journal <em>Sophia Perennis</em> during the 1970s. The price for this affiliation was turning a blind eye to the abuses of the last years of the Shah’s rule. (Bey later associated himself with Ali Shariati, a rebel against the Shah). At this time, Wilson also saw Islam as providing a penetrating critique of modernity. Knight suggests that photos from this period show a ‘happy’ Wilson, contrasting with the ‘tired’ man of today. Bey himself tells us that he converted to orthodox Sufism in 1971. This cost him ‘seven lean years’, but also taught him a lot. He is no longer a practising Muslim, but admires Sufism for its emphasis on immediacy. </p>
<p> In 1979, he was forced to flee Iran due to the rise of Khomeini, and ended up back in America. Most of his better-known writings appeared after this date. The Broadsheets of Ontological Anarchism, appeared in various zines and as decorated fliers on coloured paper in the 1980s. (Zines are homemade, anarchic counterculture magazines). These were written by Bey/Wilson, but attributed to the possibly fictitious Association for Ontological Anarchy. They were compiled, with other pieces, into the book TAZ in 1991. Bey/Wilson has written around a dozen other books and a greater number of short pieces which have developed and modified his theory. None of these works are as well-known as <em>TAZ</em>, but many offer important contributions to understanding alienation, liberation, capitalism and autonomy. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>The Imaginal World</div>
<p> The central innovation of Bey/Wilson’s approach to anarchism and transformative politics is his focus on the domain of images and spirituality. Bey/Wilson suggests that a <em>Mundus Imaginalis</em> (world or images or imagination) exists. In this world, there are ‘imaginal personae‘ or archetypes. This idea of an imaginal world comes from the work of comparative religion scholar Henry Corbin. ‘Imaginal’ means that something exists in the world of images and archetypes – it does not mean ‘imaginary’. For Bey (and Corbin), we can have relations with this realm. In his discussion of archetypes, he suggests there are three realms – the level of oneness of being, the imaginal level, and the material level. Myths are not authored, but fished from the imaginal realm. As in Jungian theory, Bey maintains that archetypes express structural universals of the human condition. For this reason, ‘lost’ religious and indigenous traditions can often be reconstructed by interpreting them through archetypes. Such texts are not fictional, so much as polemics for imaginal initiation, which manifest a process of such initiation. Imaginal links are actual – both material and spiritual – and not simply symbols or metaphors. Bey’s own writing (and the Bey persona) are in this style, a type of mythopoesis or deliberate invention of a mythical system, which channels imaginative energies through images. In one piece, Bey/Wilson advances the slogan ‘all power to the imagination‘, which he argues it still emerging as a paradigm despite setbacks since the 1960s. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Manuel González Prada – Our Indians
Mon, 15 Mar 2021 04:11:27 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Manuel González Prada<br><strong>Title</strong>: Our Indians<br><strong>Date</strong>: 1904<br><strong>Notes</strong>: “Nuestros indios” did not become part of <em>Horas de lucha</em> until the second edition in 1924. Manuel González Prada, “Nuestros Indios”, <em>Horas de lucha</em>. Second edition (Callao: Tip. Lux, 1924, pp. 311–338); Translation: Harold Eugene Davis, “Our Indians,” <em>Latin American Social Thought</em> (Washington: The University Press of Washington, 1961), pp. 196–208. For original footnotes, please consult Davis’ original text. The editor has slightly modernized this translation as well as cleared up a few ambiguities. Prepared for WWW by Dawn DeLeonardis.<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on march 2021 from<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”><strong>I</strong></div>
<p> The most eminent sociologists consider sociology a science in formation and call for the advent of its Newton, its Lavoisier, or its Lyell. Yet no other works pullulate such dogmatic and arbitrary assertions as those produced by the heirs and disciples of Comte. <a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[1]</a> One might call sociology not only the art of giving new names to old things but also the science of contradictory assertions. If one great sociologist announces a proposition, we may be certain that another no less great sociologist will advocate the diametric opposite. Just as some pedagogues remind us of the teachers of [Eugene] Scribe, so many sociologists make us think of the physicians of Moliere — Le Bon <a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[2]</a> and Tarde are not far from Diafoirus and Purgón. </p>
<p> We might mention the question of race as one upon which the authors differ most. While some see it in the principle factor of social dynamics, others reduce ethnic influences to so small a scope that they say with Durkheim: “We know no social phenomenon which falls unquestionably under dependence upon race.” <a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[3]</a> Novicow, in spite of considering the opinion of Durkheim exaggerated, does not hesitate to assert that race, like species, is to a certain point a subjective category of our spirit, without external reality; and in a generous burst of humanity he exclaims: “All those pretended incapacities of the yellow and the black people are chimeras of sick spirits.” Whoever dares say to a race, “Thus far you may come and no farther,” is blind and stupid. </p>
<p> How convenient an invention ethnology is in the hands of some men! If one grants the division of humanity into superior and inferior races and recognizes the superiority of the whites and their consequent right to govern the planet, nothing is more natural than the suppression of the Black in Africa, the Redskin in the United States, the Tagalog in the Philippines, or the Indian in Peru. Since the supreme law of life is fulfilled in the selection or elimination of the weak and unadaptable, the violent eliminators and suppressors are merely accelerating the slow and indolent labor of Nature. They abandon the pace of the tortoise for the gallop of the horse. Many, like Pearson, do not write it but allow it to be read between the lines, as when he refers to the “solidarity among civilized man of the European race against Nature and human barbarism.” Where you read “human barbarism,” it is to be translated “man without white skin.” </p>
<p> But not only is the suppression of black and yellow people decreed. Within the white race itself, classifications are made of peoples destined to live and prosper and peoples condemned to decline and die. Since Demolins published his book <em>A quoi tient la supériorité des Anglo-Saxons</em>, the fashion has been revived of glorifying the Anglo Saxons and depreciating the Latins. (Although few Latins can really be called so — for example can Atahualpa be called Galician, or Montezuma, Provençal?) <a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[4]</a> In Europe and America we see many Cassandras flourishing who live by prophesying the conflagration and destruction of the New Troy. Some pessimists, believing themselves the Deucalions of the next deluge or even the Supermen of Nietzsche, decree the disappearance of their own race as if dealing with prehistoric beings or inhabitants of the Moon. It has not been formulated, but an axiom follows [from this]. Crimes and vices of the English and the North Americans are things inherent in the human species and do not forecast the decline of a people. On the other hand, crimes and vices of the French or Italians are anomalies and indicate racial degeneration. Fortunately Oscar Wilde and General MacDonald were not born in Paris and the round table of the Emperor William was not held in Rome. </p>
<p> It seems unnecessary to say that we do not take seriously dilettanti like Paul Bourget nor mystifiers like Maurice Barrès when they thunder against cosmopolitanism and weep over the decadence of the noble French race because the daughter of a syphilitic count and a consumptive marquise allows herself to be seduced by a healthy and vigorous youth without a noble pedigree. In respect to Monsieur Gustave Le Bon, we should admire him for his very vast knowledge and his great moral elevation, even though he represents an exaggeration of Spencer, much as max Nordau does of Lombroso and Haeckel of Darwin. He deserves to be called the Bossuet of Sociology, but that is not to say the Torquemada or the Herod. If he had not made himself worthy of consideration by his observations upon occult matters (<em>sobre la luz negra</em>) we might say that he is to a sociology what doctor Sangrado [the ignorant physician of <em>Gil Blas</em>] is to medicine. </p>
<p> Le Bon warns us not in any way to take the term race in an anthropological sense, because pure races have long since almost disappeared, except among savage peoples. And to give us a secure road to march on, he decides: “Among civilized people there are only historical events.” According to the Le Bon’s dogma, Hispanic American nations constitute one of these races, but a race so exceptional that it has passed dizzily from childhood to decrepitude, covering in less than a century the course run by other peoples in three, four, five, and even six thousand years. “The twenty-two Latin American republics of America,” he says in his <em>Psichologie du socialisme</em>, “although all situated in the richest regions of the Globe, are incapable of developing their immense resources…. The final destiny of that half of America is to return to primitive barbarism unless the United States do it the great service of conquering it…. To debase the richest regions of the Globe to the level of the black republics of Santo Domingo and Haiti, this is what the Latin race has accomplished in less than a century with half of America.” <a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[5]</a></p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Manuel González Prada – The Intellectual and the Worker
Mon, 15 Mar 2021 03:45:54 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Manuel González Prada<br><strong>Title</strong>: The Intellectual and the Worker<br><strong>Subtitle</strong>: <em>(Speech read on the 1<sup>st</sup> of May 1905 to the Bread Workers Federation)</em><br><strong>Date</strong>: 1905<br><strong>Notes</strong>: Translated by Cathleen Carris<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on march 2021 from<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> Ladies and Gentlemen: </p>
<p> Don’t laugh if we begin by translating the verses of a poet. </p>
<p> On a hot day’s evening, Nature dozes off in the Sun’s rays, like a women exhausted by her lover’s caresses. </p>
<p> A young farm worker, panting and bathed in sweat, drives his oxen. But all of a sudden, he stops to speak to a young man who arrives singing a song: </p>
<p> “Lucky you! You spend your life singing while I, from dawn until dusk, wear myself out plowing fields and planting wheat.” </p>
<p> “Oh farmer, how you deceive yourself!” the young poet replies. “We both are of the same ilk and can call ourselves brothers; because if your work is planting seeds in the ground, mine is planting seeds in people’s hearts. Your work is as fruitful as my own: grains of wheat to sustain the body, the poet’s songs to delight and nourish the soul. </p>
<p> This poem teaches us that it is just as valuable to plant wheat in the fields as it is to spread ideas in our heads. Thinkers who work with their intelligence are not better than laborers who work with their hands. Instead of marching separately and thinking of each other as enemies, lawyers and factory workers should walk united in a bond that cannot be broken. </p>
<p> But, is there any work that is either purely intellectual or exclusively physical? Workers think and ponder: blacksmiths making locks, bricklayers leveling walls, printers making proofs, carpenters refining their handiwork, miners striking a vein – even potters think and ponder. There is only one kind of mindless physical work – that done by machines. Where workers use their hands, they also use their heads. The reverse is true with the tasks we call intellectual. The mental fatigue of creative and thoughtful minds goes hand in hand with the physical fatigue of those who perform physical labor. They get tired and overwhelmed: painters by their brushes, sculptors by their chisel, musicians by their instruments, and writers by their pens – even orators get tired and overwhelmed by the use of words. What could be less physical than prayer and ecstasy? Well, the mystic does give in to the effort of kneeling down and puts his arms on the cross. </p>
<p> Physical strength and mental energy create and sustain human works. In any set of railroad tracks, each cross tie represents the life of one person. As we travel along them, let us imagine that we coast in our car along rails nailed on the backs of a series of cadavers. However, as we travel through museums and libraries, let us also imagine that we pass through a kind of cemetery where stones, statues, and books contain not only the thoughts, but the life of each author. </p>
<p> You (we speak only to the bread bakers), you stay awake kneading flour and watching over the dough rising and the ovens heating. At the same time, many people who don’t make bread also stay awake – sharpening their minds, using their pen and fighting off sleep’s powerful advances. These are the journalists. When in the early hours of the morning the daily news leaves hot off the presses at the same time as the sweet-smelling and provocative bread rises up from the ovens, we should then ask ourselves: who made better use of the night, the reporter or the baker? </p>
<p> True, the newspaper contains the encyclopedia of the masses – knowledge given in small doses and science dressed in the simple language of the people. It is the book for those who do not have a library, the reading for those who hardly know or want to read. And what of bread? A symbol of nutrition or of life, it is not happiness, but there is no happiness without it. Its absence brings darkness and creates discord at home. But its presence brings light and tranquility. When the fresh-baked bread arrives, children welcome it with cries of joy and the old with a smile of contented relief. Vegetarians, who loathe meat as unwholesome and reprehensible, bless bread as healthy and restorative food. Some things cannot be replaced – millionaires may expel pure crystal water from their table, but they have not been able to find a substitute for it or do without it. Water is absolutely required whether you’re in Rothschild’s home or a beggar’s shack. In ancient times of myth and legend, queens used to bake bread and ration it out to hungry pilgrims. Today common people bake bread, and in Russia they offer it as a sign of hospitality to the czars when they visit the towns and cities. Yet Nicholas II and his whole line of tyrants respond to this offering with whips, sabers, and bullets. <a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[1]</a></p>
<p> If journalists claim that theirs is the greater task, we could reply: the mind cannot survive on thoughts alone; not everyone reads, but everyone has to eat. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>II</div>
<p> When we extol the union or alliance of intelligence with manual labor we do not expect by way of an illusory hierarchy that the intellectual will act as a tutor or instructor for the worker. We owe the idea that the brain performs a more noble function than the muscle to the caste system. Ever since the grand empires of the East there have been men who claim for themselves the right to think, designating for the masses the obligation of believing and working. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Manuel González Prada – Free Thought of Action
Mon, 15 Mar 2021 03:26:04 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Manuel González Prada<br><strong>Title</strong>: Free Thought of Action<br><strong>Date</strong>: 1898<br><strong>Notes</strong>: Translated by Thomas Ward &amp; Emily DePietro.<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on march 2021 from<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p><em>(This speech should have been read the 28th of August of 1898 in the third Conference organized for the League of Freethinkers of Peru. The lecture could not take place because the Government prevented it.)</em></p>
<hr />
<p> Gentlemen: </p>
<p> I give the most sincere thanks to the members of the League for having honored me at their assembly, especially so, since I am not a member of this body destined to have such a great impact in our social life. </p>
<p> I will say something of free thought, in its silent, and spoken varieties, but especially in its most far reaching sense, free thought of action, the one that produces the greatest fruits. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>I</div>
<p> Freedom of thought in silence is not discussed, it is a given. Since no one can get into our brains to scrutinize our thought process, we speak with ourselves without our inner voices resonating in the eardrums of others, nor engraving itself in phonographic cylinders. Free from inquisitors and tyrants, we have a place where we can worship whatever gods please us, where we can build a throne for good, or a gallows for evil. </p>
<p> This kind of free thinking does not serve too much in life’s battles and the man that practices it is nothing more than a selfish philosopher, a barren brain, in a word, he is nothing. Why condemn superstitions in internal law, if in the world we approved of them tacitly? What is the benefit of making believe we strangle criminals, if really we are extending a hand of friendship? What good is it to Humanity, if wise men get lost in themselves, without communicating their knowledge to anybody? Shuttered lanterns are only lit on the inside. </p>
<p> When a conviction is cherished, it is not guarded religiously like a family’s jewel, nor is it packaged hermetically like a very subtle perfume: it is exposed to the air and to the sun, it is left within free reach of all intelligent beings. Humanity does not consist in secretly possessing its mental riches, but in freeing them from the mind, dressing them with the wings of language so that they fly around the world to penetrate the minds of others. If all the philosophers had philosophized in silence, humanity would not have left its childhood and societies would continue crawling in the limb of superstitions. </p>
<p> Acquired truths for individuals do not constitute their personal patrimony: they form part of human wealth. Nothing belongs to us, because of nothing we are the creators. The ideas that are most our own, come to us from the intellectual world in which we breathe or from the artificial atmosphere formed from reading. That which we give to one, we have taken from others: that which seems like an offering is nothing more than a restitution to its rightful heirs. But, even if it were not so, is there any more valuable gift than thought? When giving our heart to those who love us, we pay them a debt; when offering thought to someone we don’t know, to an adversary, to those who hate us, we follow the inexhaustible freedom of nature that lavishes its goods on the saint and on the sinner, to the dove and to the hawk, to the lamb and to the wolf. </p>
<p> It has been more than two thousand years since Chinese philosophers have said: <em>Give much, receive little</em>. This brave counsel involves a lesson of inexpressible generosity, of immense charity. But silent free thinkers don’t want to enjoy the supreme delight <a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[1]</a> of authorizing themselves without reserve, preferring to live in peace, and happy, never bothered because of their impieties or meditations. Favoring them substantially, we should compare them with underground rivers that flow to the sea, without calming a thirst nor fertilizing a seed. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>II</div>
<p> If mute free thought functions without disturbing the philosopher’s tranquility, the same is not true with free thought that is spoken and written. A person who speaks and writes with valiant independence in retrograde societies, provokes recriminations and storms, taking a gamble in the face of the anathemas of the priest, the violent acts of the boss, and the impulsive fits of the popular beast. </p>
<p> No one attacks a privilege nor ridicules a superstition without arousing thousands of protesting voices nor thousands of threatening gestures. All condemn an error, all hurt from an injustice; but Humanity hides so many despicable acts and so much cowardice, that in the din of the fight it is customary to unite oneself with tormentors in order to fight the defenders. At times, there is no crime so unforgivable as to speak what we think or to shout what we murmur in a low voice. In the realm of iniquity and falsehood, a verb is called for which severely censors the criminals; but, when the verb roars without hypocrisy nor adulation, only then the most fervent friends of the truth make the greatest ruckus, thundering out the noisiest protests. </p>
<p> In order to deserve the title of good citizen and to figure in the classic list of wise men, it is necessary to be satisfied with the uses and prejudices of one’s time, venerating the absurdities of the religion into which one is born, justifying the iniquities of the native country in which one has lived, never breaking the antediluvian mold nor wanting to flap outside of the prehistoric cage. Forget about opposing someone or something, or of being intransigent: morality resolves itself by compromising with the immortalities of one’s medium, virtue is reduced to a hypocritical and malleable opportunity. When it is said, then, of a man: He respects the law, translate: Servile nature. The moral perfection of almost all good gentlemen on the list is condensed in two words: Lackey Spirits. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Anarchist Yondae (Anarchist Solidarity) – Swines, too, Have Their Freedom of Grunting
Mon, 15 Mar 2021 01:00:00 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Anarchist Yondae (Anarchist Solidarity)<br><strong>Title</strong>: Swines, too, Have Their Freedom of Grunting<br><strong>Subtitle</strong>: — On the COVID-19 re-outbreak in Korea —<br><strong>Date</strong>: August 24, 2020<br><strong>Notes</strong>: 〈개새끼에게도 짖을 자유는 있어야 한다〉 ― 코로나 바이러스 재확산에 즈음하여 Translated by 비판적강령술<br><strong>Source</strong>:<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Get the test, Stay in hospital</div>
<p> Extreme-Right-wings of Korea, including Pastor Jun Kwang Hoon and his fanatic followers of Sarang Jeil Church(Church of Love First) have broken a social rule which Korean people implicitly agreed on, on the fatal day of August 15, 2020. People of Korea have participated in social distancing, or put masks on autonomously, not because forced to or regulated to, but to prevent COVID-19 destroying society. But the extreme rights have committed white terrorism on their public demonstration to denounce ‘liberal’ government, by not wearing any masks, and by spitting on passers-by wishing they get infected. It caused the numbers of confirmed cases of COVID-19 in Korea, which had been stabled for months, started to explode again. </p>
<p> They are so obsessed with conspiracy that they claim diagnostic testings are a plot by communists to isolate Sarang Jeil Church. Those who confirmed to be positive does not stay in hospital but escape from hospital. They are spreading not only virus, but also anxiety, insecurity, fear into community. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Direct Action Needed</div>
<p> So we hereby declare that those right-wings, or white terrorists, do not want to co-live with other people then the members of their own community. And we demand them to stop epidemic terrorism, and to concentrate on getting tested, to stay in hospital. If it’s not done, we will put all the efforts on, with other members of Korean social community, to stop the terrorism, by the means of communal direct action. If they dare to risk the communal security stabled by social agreement, our direct action will risk their security on fascist action. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>On the Governmental Attempt to Resurrect Fascism</div>
<p> However, we denounce the Korean governments’ attempt to restrict people’s freedom in the name of disinfection. By that name, Korean Government is trying to restrict people’s right to assemble, saying they will “arrest without warrant” and will “demand legally maximum sentence” if people demonstrate or assemble. This makes it not only merely impossible to prevent epidemic effectively, but also, and most importantly, killing freedom, which is indispensible. And hierarchy had always took advantage of some kinds of fear to kill individual freedom and to establish totalitarian regime. </p>
<p> Are public demonstrations the main reasons of spreading virus? For last few months of outbreak, were there spreads where public demonstration been held? It is not. And the government, who have been proud of themselves and their so-called ‘K-quarantine’ with the principles of ‘Test, Trace, Treat’, should know best. Therefore, we, as anarchists, reject this full-of-governmentally-created-fear measures, considering it as a kind of martial law. </p>
<p> Main reason why Korea, and its ‘K-quarantine’ has been successful, was regard to Korean people’s individual, voluntary, autonomous effort to stay sanitary and not to hurt themselves and community. It was not any restriction, or governmental force that made people wash their hands and put masks on. This autonomous action by masses is the most effective, and moreover, the only effective weapon against COVID-19. </p>
<p> If the government, as they formally say, is aware of the lives and safety of the Korean people, they should just stay out of the scene. Governmental restriction of individual freedom is just making those extreme-right-wings ‘militants of freedom’. Or, maybe it is there liberal wish to smash extreme-rights first and then, smash all their oppositions, such as us radicals. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>We Will Take Care of It, by Ourselves.</div>
<p> Therefore, we hereby calls for abolishing every governmental attempt that violate any individual freedom. We will put on masks, waive meetings unless it is urgent, get tested, get isolated, distance socially on by ourselves, voluntarily, not because the government gives us ‘orders’ to put on masks or ‘maximum sentence’, but for our own safety and collective safety, </p>
<p> Sarang Jeil Church, Pastor Jun, and his extreme-right followers might be fascist swines, but they still have their precious freedom to grunt. And it is the masses, true masters of the society, who are to muzzle and leash those filthy swines. Government should leave us alone. </p>
<div class=”amw-teaser-no-ellipsis”></div>

Zo d’Axa – On The Street
Sun, 14 Mar 2021 20:48:41 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Zo d’Axa<br><strong>Title</strong>: On The Street<br><strong>Date</strong>: 2014<br><strong>Notes</strong>: Translated by Wolfi Landstreicher and retrieved from Ardent Press’ ‘<em>Disruptive Elements: The Extremes of French Anarchism</em>’.<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 14th March 2021 from<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> Should I say: from Mazas to Jerusalem—and back (via Marseilles, Sainte-Pélagie and the holding prison)? I might think so. On the occasion of Carnot’s funeral,<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[1]</a> I found a handful of comrades in prison who they arrest at every celebration including May Day.<br /> These festivals usually end for them in Mazas.<br /> But the warden called me almost immediately:<br /> I am free.<br /> The idiotic police arrested me too soon. They overstepped their order, which was to leave me at least a few hours of liberty—the ethical time in which to commit a crime. That’s what it’s like to be in a rush!<br /> The mistake granted me a few days’ reprieve. So I left without further hindrance…Around the warden’s apartment, the side streets and docks speak softly, and it is like a transition to the clamor of the avenues.<br /> The eighteen months robbed from my life already belong to the past.<br /> Only the present matters.<br /> When he first goes out, a convalescent tends to be flustered. I shook off the lethargy of prison more quickly, because it was so brutal. And now the passersby that I brush against, the noise of the streetcars and the pungent air don’t daze me at all. My step is still familiar on the Parisian pavement.<br /> Where will it lead me?<br /> To join the anarchists again?<br /> In the criminal court, in the preliminary investigation as well as the hearings, I scorned this ex-planation. My words of rage and compassion were characterized as anarchist. I made no comment under threat.<br /> Now I would like to clarify my first thought, the desire I have always had.<br /> It must not sink into vague approximation.<br /> No more grouped into anarchy, than recruited into socialism. Being a free man, a loner who searches beyond; but not bewitched by a dream. Having the ferocity to affirm oneself, outside of schools and sects:<br /> Outside.<br /> Here I am forced to conclude: I am not an anarchist.<br /> The facetious journalists commented rather superficially, exclaiming: “But they’re inside!” when we were thrown into prison.<br /> And then, above the grayness of all doubts, this appears in the brilliance of vigorous color:<br /> The Will to Live.<br /> And to live outside oppressive laws, outside narrow rules, even outside the ideally formulated theories of the world to come.<br /> To live without believing in a divine paradise or hoping too much for a paradise on earth.<br /> To live for the present, outside of the mirage of future society; to live and to feel this existence in the proud enjoyment of social conflict.<br /> It is more than a state of mind; it is a way of being—here and now.<br /> For too long, men have been led along, being shown the conquest of the heavens. We don’t even want to wait until we’ve conquered the earth.<br /> Let each of us go on for his own pleasure.<br /> And if there are those who get left along the way, if there are those whom nothing can awaken, if there are innate slaves, people who are incurably degraded, so much the worse for them! Understanding this means going on ahead. And joy lies in acting. We don’t have the time to show the way: life is short. Individually, we rush to the attacks that call us.<br /> Someone has spoken of dilettantism. But this isn’t gratuitous, nor platonic: we pay…<br /> And we start again… </p>
<p class=”fnline”><a class=”footnotebody” href=”#”>[1]</a> The French President assassinated by Italian anarchist Sante Caserio. Caserio’s cry before the guillotine was: “Courage, cousins! Long live anarchy!” </p>
<div class=”amw-teaser-no-ellipsis”></div>

Zo d’Axa – Any Opportunity
Sun, 14 Mar 2021 20:30:28 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Zo d’Axa<br><strong>Title</strong>: Any Opportunity<br><strong>Date</strong>: 2014<br><strong>Notes</strong>: Translated by Vincent Stone and retrieved from Ardent Press’ ‘<em>Disruptive Elements: The Extremes of French Anarchism</em>’.<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 14th March 2021 from<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> When you go your own way, alone, you take any opportunity to delight in saying what the average person wouldn’t dare. Concern for edifying neighbors or gossips is over. No more morality! No more games! Enough of partisan-traps…To the argument of the masses, to the catechisms of the crowds, to all of the community’s national interests: to these are opposed the Individual’s personal interests. </p>
<p> Which interests? </p>
<p> To each their own. The isolated one is careful not to preach a common rule. The defiant makes no place for a doctrine. Think for yourself! What is your situation? Your age? Your desire? Your strength? Do you need the crutches religion offers you? If so, go back to your church, from now on by your own choice, validated. Do you prefer, still a disciple, the sociologists’ dream? Fine then, tell us your plans for the year two thousand. Or rather, are you feeling insolent? So you want to live? Are you ready? Well quit waiting on somebody, go where your hatred, your joys, carry you—the joys of complete openness, of dangers and of dignity. </p>
<p> One marches, acts, aims, because of a combative instinct, a nostalgic sleep makes you prefer the fight. Fully aware of the limits of the code, you poach the big game: officers and judges, deer and carnivores; you flush out the herds of politicians from the forests of Bondy; you’re happy to grab a ravaging financier by the collar; at all the intersections; you release the domesticated tribe of authors and writers, furry and feathered alike, defilers of ideas, terrors of the press and the police. </p>
<p> With the quarrels between sects, races, and parties, every day, by the chance of events and shots to be taken, it becomes clear: <em>Dreyfus Affair!<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[1]</a> Read all about it!</em> or the way of describing the Magistra-ture and the Army as they deserve it…. Let us celebrate the ermine and the madder! The conscious destroyers don’t specialize: in turns, according to the situation, they point right or they point left. </p>
<p> At the same time, <em>l’esprit de corps</em> will produce great results: the magistrates, the military, the suits, the liveries, all of the servants of Society badmouth the old madam. An office full of rumors goes sour. The robes,<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[2]</a> rabbis and curés, the officiators, the officials and the officers, the accomplices in the antechamber juggle objects of worship. They scandalize the believers. Doubt will unstitch their eyelids. In a few months the child-people will be shocked to find that they hid “things” from them… Now confidence is dead: the bad shepherds killed it. Near the smashed flagpole, the scales of justice lie there like scrap iron next to the wood pile… </p>
<p> It’s in vain that, with the crisis over, the junk traders of the Fatherland try to fix anything. This practice will become increasingly rare. The farce of a France signifying, amongst nations, prog-ress or generosity won’t fool too many onlookers: never has there been a tribe more persistent in keeping mankind at the whipping post. </p>
<p> Moreover, it’s only with contradiction that one buys the legend of Dreyfusism any more—such a spectacle of real Truth. The nude woman before the mirror sees far too little in her glass. She sings the praises of legality, forgetting that they legally shoot conscripts convicted of a simple gesture; and that also legally, in our streets, on winter nights, men and little children die in front of closed doors. Down with these closed doors—the worst! As for these necessary revisions, the beautiful lady won’t say a word about them. </p>
<p> Always the big words: law, duty, honor, public safety—ring out in every clan, under oppos-ing banners. They use sensationalist words. It’s military music, a church song, the various couplets of a public gathering. Those men who don’t get enlisted turn their nose up at sensationalist words.Not serving in the camps, they save their passionate loyalty in the fight for the right word and the precise blow. One leadership can’t count on them any more than another. They despise diplomacy, tactics, hesitations. They are suspect: in every camp, naturally, they are viewed as loose cannons. They leave the soldiers’ pay, the stripes, and the new lies to others. </p>
<p> It’s a lie to continue to promise, after so many promises. The prophets and the pontiffs, the preachers, and the utopians hoodwink us and show us, off in the distance, an era of love. We’ll be dead: the promised land is the one in which we will rot. What reason, what motives are there to hypnotize ourselves? No more mirages! We want—and by all possible means, disrespectful by na-ture of laws and prejudices, we want—immediately—to conquer all the fruits and flowers that life has to offer. If later a revolution results from scattered efforts—so much the better! That would be good. Impatient, we will have preceded it. </p>
<p> So continue to declaim, good sirs, if it pleases you. And you, professionals, if it pleases you, cry over Society. But another grown-up, France, it seems, is also sick. Let’s not doubt it, it’s serious. Two abstractions are better than one. So go on then! Into the face of peril! Conspiracy here… cor-ruption there! Let’s hunt down the jew “who is bringing us ruin and dishonoring us.” Let’s expel the congregationalists. Flamidien! Dreyfus! What’s next? For the <em>République!</em> For Society! Long live Loubet! yada, yada, Panamada.<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[3]</a></p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Alan Jakšić – 21,000 Kosovo Serbs and counting seek Russian citizenship
Sun, 14 Mar 2021 17:23:07 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Alan Jakšić<br><strong>Title</strong>: 21,000 Kosovo Serbs and counting seek Russian citizenship<br><strong>Subtitle</strong>: an Anarchist perspective<br><strong>Date</strong>: 25 November 2011<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 14<sup>th</sup> March 2021 from <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a><br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> Last week, we heard news that over 20,000 Serbs in Kosovo are seeking Russian citizenship. This news has come about not long after recent clashes had occurred at the border posts between Serbia and Kosovo, which occurred after local Serbs in the mainly-Serb north of Kosovo had placed barricades in response to Priština’s imposition of Kosovan state customs officers. However, most of those Serbs applying to become Russian citizens live in various enclaves further south from the major clashes in the north. Also, away from the border crossings, a shooting incident occurred between ethnic Serbs and Albanians in the divided city of <strong>Kosovska Mitrovica</strong> (or simply <strong>Mitrovica</strong>), in which two Serbs got injured and a third got killed. </p>
<p> As far as Serb nationalists are concerned, this is a painful reminder of how the Serbian people are losing their country bit by bit. And what adds fuel to their anger is how the government in Belgrade seems to be doing nothing about it. For me as an Anarchist Serb, however, I view this as a failure on the part of both states: a failure on the Serbian state, that its own citizens have lost faith in the country they recognise as their own to the extent that they’re seeking another country’s citizenship; and a failure on the Kosovan state, for not being able — or perhaps willing — to integrate these people, who still don’t consider that region to be outside of Serbia, let alone recognise it as a separate country! And generally speaking, I see this as another failure of the whole concept of the <strong>nation state</strong>, another in a <em>long</em> list of failures and <em>disasters</em> stretching back to the 19<sup>th</sup> century as far as the Balkans are concerned, and especially over the course of the last 20 years in the former Yugoslavia. </p>
<p> Nation states are supposed to be states for one specific ethnic group, whose leaders and army will protect them within defined borders, even though many people within those borders do not belong to the ethnic group that that state is named after, and thus represents foremost. These people are considered <strong>ethnic minorities</strong> in relation to the <strong>majority population</strong> in such a state. And as it happens, all Balkan states have <em>numerous</em> ethnic minorities living within their borders. </p>
<p> However, wars have occurred when, in one country, one ethnic minority, led by hardline nationalists, seeks to unite their home region, in which they constitute the majority, with the neighbouring state that bears their ethnic name, which they see as their <strong>mother country</strong>. By uniting their homeland with their mother country, they would be increasing its borders, landmass and population, while “liberating” themselves from the state their homeland is already a part of, which they usually accuse of having treated them really badly in the past on the basis of their ethnicity! What I’ve just described to you is often regarded as “irredentism”, of which there are many examples in Balkan history, and Kosovo is one of them. </p>
<p> But — and this is a BIG but — even in such regions, in which one ethnic minority actually constitutes the majority, there will also be ethnic minorities, who live there among the majority population of that particularly region in that country. And quite often the case will be that one of those ethnic minorities in such regions may actually constitute the <em>majority population</em> in that country <em>as a whole</em>! And it’s precisely <em>that</em> ethnic minority that will demonstrate strong allegiance to the country their home region belongs to, even though they don’t consititute the majority population in the region they live in! </p>
<p> In Kosovo, there have been ethnic tensions between the majority Albanians and minority Serbs for decades, tensions that not even the former Communist régime at the time could properly resolve, yet caused many Serbs to leave their homes in the autonomous province for central Serbia. Following <strong>Tito</strong>‘s death, Kosovo Albanian students lead huge protests calling for Kosovo’s status to be raised to that of a republic within the Yugoslav federaton. Then came <strong>Milošević</strong>, who practically revoked the province’s autonomy and made life very hard for the majority population in that province, to say the least. And in time, came a war which caused two waves of ethnic cleansing: the first wave was experienced by Albanians, and the second by Serbs and other non-Albanians; each wave being traumatic for either group(s). And let’s not forget the smaller wave of ethnic cleansing that occurred during the <strong>2004 pogrom</strong> against Kosovo Serbs in the full view of the then <strong>KFOR</strong>, which should’ve protected them. And finally, Kosovo unilaterally declared independence from Serbia in 2008, and has since been recognised as an independent and sovereign state by well over 80 states around the world. Needless to say, Serbia has refused to recognise Kosovo’s independence since its proclamation. </p>
<hr />
<p> So have relations between Serbs and Albanians improved since independence? Well, I can’t really answer that question, since I neither live there nor have I ever been there. Though from what I’ve heard, Serb and Albanian gangsters seem to be getting on really well there and have done so for years, despite Kosovo’s political instability! </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Alan Jakšić – Serious points about Kosovo’s self declared independence hardly mentioned by others
Sun, 14 Mar 2021 17:14:18 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Alan Jakšić<br><strong>Title</strong>: Serious points about Kosovo’s self declared independence hardly mentioned by others<br><strong>Date</strong>: 1 March 2008<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 14<sup>th</sup> March 2021 from <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a><br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> Kosovo’s Albanian leaders have declared independence from Serbia. But what has happened since? </p>
<p> Albanians in the province-turned-self-declared-state celebrated it, along with fellow ethnics in Europe and America. Serbs in Kosovo, on the other hand, have demonstrated against it, along with <em>their</em> fellow ethnics in Serbia, Bosnia and elsewhere. Both reactions were to be expected, just not some of the actions we’ve seen, such as the burning of other countries’ embassies in Belgrade. </p>
<p> Many countries in Europe — read, in the European Union (EU) — were keen to recognise Kosovo’s independence from Serbia, convinced that it is the best solution for the province, as does America. (The EU, of course, has recently sent in EULEX to help form a new legislative infrastructure in Kosovo.) Russia opposes it, convinced that it could set a dangerous precedent for the rest of the world, and Spain within the EU opposes it, along with a few other EU countries, due to internal problems with separatists of their own. </p>
<p> Serbia doesn’t want to recognise the self-declared republic of Kosovo; a large body of Serbs don’t want to recognise it. And you know what? They don’t have to. It’s their right not to recognise it, just like it is the right of other countries like Albania and other private individuals around the world to do the opposite. </p>
<p> There are many problems with the unilateral declaration of independence, however peaceful and dignified the ceremony in Priština was. However, I want to share other reasons that I have never heard specifically mentioned by any one else. Maybe <em>alluded</em> to by others, but not explicitly and not with great focus. </p>
<p> But first of all, let me tell you what I think <em>isn’t</em> the problem, or isn’t <em>just</em> the problem. It’s: </p>
<p><strong>NOT Koštunica</strong>, and I have to say this, because there are people who are actually blaming him for the way Serbs in Kosovo and Belgrade have reacted to the declaration! At the recent rally in Belgrade, he gave a very patriotic, even nationalistic, speech against Kosovo’s independence and separation from Serbia. But I can’t take such an accusation seriously. You see, what these people are forgetting is that Vojislav Koštunica represents what many Serbs <em>already</em> think and feel about Kosovo and other issues <em>without</em> him having to mention anything openly. Those young men who attacked the embassies in Belgrade might have felt encouraged to do so by the rally, which was attended by hundreds of thousands of people, if not a million, and many famous people from Serbia and neighbouring countries spoke there — not just Koštunica. But Vojislav himself can’t be held personally responsible for such vandalism. (By the way, I don’t agree with many of Dr. Vojislav Koštunica’s views; some of them are just not impractical and thus, not helpful/beneficial for Serbia.) Also it’s </p>
<p><strong>NOT <em>JUST</em> Milošević</strong>, who, as we know, caused a lot of the modern-day problems that the people of Kosovo face, both Serbian and Albanian though in different ways and for the other minorities. And of course, </p>
<p><strong>it’s NOT about “Greater Albania”</strong>, even if some Albanians want it! (Actually, Kosovo Albanians prefer the independent state option and no doubt Albanians in Albania do as well, presumeably seeing such a state as a “natural ally” in the region.) </p>
<p> This issue is, of course, a statist issue: specifically, a region within a state has declared independence from the mother state, which in turn doesn’t recognise its declaration nor its new-found existence. Being an anarchist, I don’t believe in the concept of states. In fact, because of what is happening with Kosovo, my belief in the anti-state principles of Anarchism is that much justified. </p>
<p> For me, the problems in Kosovo between Serbs and Albanians, which I hardly hear <em>anyone</em> mention are these three things: </p>
<p><strong>Lack of TRUST;</strong></p>
<p><strong>Lack of INTER-ETHNIC DIALOGUE.</strong> And hence, </p>
<p><strong>Lack of INTER-COMMUNAL UNDERSTANDING.</strong></p>
<p> Kosovo Albanians have wanted independence for a long time, and no doubt with even greater determination since the Kosovo war that ended almost ten years ago in 1999. Because of the recent events in history, and also before, they don’t want to be part of Serbia any more. Kosovo Albanians don’t trust Serbia, which is, considering the history, understandable. But what doesn’t seem to occur to many of them and even other people (!) — or at least <em>I</em> haven’t seen that it substantially has — is that Kosovo Serbs don’t trust <em>them</em>, i.e. Kosovo Albanians and Kosovo governmental institutions. </p>
<p> The distrust that Kosovo Serbs have for Kosovo Albanians has existed for a very long time. Even during Tito’s Yugoslavia, there was, let’s just say, nowhere near as much social cohesion — read, “Brotherhood &amp; Unity” (<em>Bratstvo i Jedinstvo</em>) — between them as there was between Serbs, Croats and Muslims in Bosnia, where there were plenty of mixed marriages. </p>
<p> And just to set the record staright, it wasn’t Milošević who created this distrust that Kosovo Serbs feel for Kosovo Albanians; he infamously <em>utilised</em> it! (Remember <em>“Niko ne sme da vas bije”</em> and the revocation of Kosovo’s autonomy? There you go.) And neither did Koštunica create it; he just doesn’t have either the ability or the will or both of which to remedy such sentiment. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Anonymous – Communiqué for Anarchist Actions in Barcelona and Response to the Nihilist Comrades
Sat, 13 Mar 2021 04:58:01 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Anonymous<br><strong>Title</strong>: Communiqué for Anarchist Actions in Barcelona and Response to the Nihilist Comrades<br><strong>Date</strong>: 28 February 2013<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 6<sup>th</sup> March 2021 from <a class=”text-amuse-link” href=””></a><br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> With this communiqué, we wish to claim the following actions, as part of a struggle for the destruction of the State, Capital, patriarchy, and any system of domination, a struggle for the free creation of voluntary and solidaristic relations at the global and local level; in other words, a struggle for anarchy. </p>
<p> May 5, at night, we told a child the story of the maquis and the anarchist struggle against Franco and against democracy. <br /> May 13, we cooked a healthy meal for a comrade who has a chronic illness. <br /> May 17, we wrote a letter to a comrade imprisoned for participating in a riot. <br /> June 12, we took care of the infant of some friends who suffer economic precarity and the imposed obligation of wage labor. <br /> June 16, we spoke publically with our neighbors about the need to burn the banks and attack the police in order to realize our dreams. <br /> June 19, we told some leftist activists that the masked-ones were not police infiltrators but ourselves, and that it was necessary and good to mask up and take the streets with force. <br /> June 20, we gifted vegetables from our garden to friends and neighbors, without money or exchange. </p>
<p> Why do we claim these actions? In the last months, we have also barricaded roads with dumpsters, burned banks, injured journalists, smashed shop windows, and attacked cops. </p>
<p> For us, the attacks against the system are essential to our struggle. But we’ve fooled ourselves. A struggle does not consist only in attacks. The attacks are NOT more important than the need to care for ourselves, to preserve and spread our collective history, to create relations based in the gift, solidarity, and reciprocity, to imagine new worlds and new struggles, to confront our isolation and establish subversive and honest relationships with people outside of the categoric and political ghetto in which the Spectacle hides us. </p>
<p> With a long memory, it becomes apparent that we have lost several times in the past, and that the hardest of all is the historical fracturing and the loss of our own memory of struggle; it’s having to start from scratch. Hyperalienation, against which nihilism is a logical response, is nothing more than the result of defeat in past struggles. We find ourselves in a totality which must be destroyed in its entirety, only because nothing remains of what we built up in the past. So as not to lose everything every single time we rise up, we have to sustain ourselves, not as isolated individuals but as a commune, a collective and multigenerational struggle. And this cannot be accomplished with a singular prioritization of the attacks. </p>
<p> The hierarchy of tactics belonging to the Left was minimally transformed within nihilism: they took the head of the spear, the actions that were supposedly more important, as the only ones that mattered, and forgot about all the rest. </p>
<p> It is a patriarchal and counterproductive vision. It is the forgetting of all the actions—first disappeared by the patriarchy, then by capitalism, and then by the supposedly anticapitalist Left—that are necessary for life and for struggle as well. The most aggressive tactics only make sense and can be sustained and repeated in a complex of actions of all types, as long as they are libertarian and direct. </p>
<p> By not understanding that struggle means carrying with us a new world that is waiting to be born in the ashes of the dominant system, we transform ourselves into mere weapons against capitalism, in tools dedicated to destroy, without the other things that human beings need to live and fight. It is capitalism that wishes to treat us as tools We should not do the same. </p>
<p> The truth is that we are overjoyed to learn of the attacks of the nihilists and other comrades. We know very well that bravery and rage are two of the most important things in order to rebel. Specifically in Barcelona, it seemed an error to us that in the last year fewer illegal attacks were realized as more opportunities to participate in broad spaces appeared. Naturally, the rise in attacks—carried out by nihilists and by more “social” comrades—pleased us. And at the global level, we laughed to find out about the kneecapping of the director of Ansaldo Nuclear in Italy, and we were inspired to read the letters of comrades (nihilist and other) imprisoned in Greece who have not submitted to fear. </p>
<p> But too many times we’ve seen comrades who, departing from desperation, impatience, and alienation, threw themselves recklessly into the war against the State that all of us live daily. They always ended up dead or in prison, and often after less than a year. And then what happened? The others, the comrades who survived, did everything we could to support each other and to support the prisoners, to not forget the slain, to not let the repression win, to not lose all our strength and not allow a historical fracture, so that we don’t lose our collective memory of struggle. </p>
<p> But little by little this memory is lost, and every three or four years a new group appears that neglects all the other tasks of the struggle to dedicate themselves solely to the destruction of our common enemy. And when we support them but also criticize, or sometimes without even that provocation, they call us cowards for dedicating ourselves to other tasks (even though we also are in the riots or the nighttime actions), for differing with them ideologically and not glorifying their group or informal federation. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Lilly May – A New United Front
Sat, 13 Mar 2021 04:58:01 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Lilly May<br><strong>Title</strong>: A New United Front<br><strong>Date</strong>: 1/28/2021<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 1/28/2021 from<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Preamble</div>
<p> The current state of organizing within leftist spaces is not focused. Many have tried to combat this, of particular note are the platformists who try to focus intensely on their praxis. However, to date organizing with the left more often than not, to be blunt, more characteristic of <em>dis</em>-organization. Therefore, a new approach must be taken up to combat the lack of focus and general disorganization found within leftist circles. Federationism provides this level of focus and organization necessary. Praxis being the application of theory to actions taken in the world, within praxis is also the idea of direct action which is to use praxis to directly reach certain goals without appealing to the state or elections to address the issue. </p>
<p> The people of the world are increasingly restless in the face of increasing authoritarianism; inaction on issues of importance from localities to the world stage; and the failures of the state, capitalism, and hierarchy. People often get confused and overwhelmed trying to figure out what they can do. The left provides a great myriad of solutions big and small, and it is just too much, people become frozen with choice paralysis. What people need are digestible choices which are clear in their intent and efficacy. Federationism again steps in to fill this need by employing a triad of praxis which gives clarity to what people can do to resist against the issues which keep them oppressed. </p>
<p> The aim of this text is to provide a clear set of actions that federationism promotes as furthering tangible resistance to oppression, and to provide a strong groundwork for the efforts of universal liberation. This text will be expanding on the two federationist principles of the triad of praxis and the prepared revolution. The goal of each item is to place supreme emphasis on materially helping people, showing people why joining a movement toward federationism is beneficial to themselves and others, or both. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>A New United Front</div>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Federationist Leagues and Federationist Associations</div>
<p> The goal of liberation can only be reached through liberatory methods. Federationism must be organized in accordance with the ultimate intention of liberatory institutions in mind. As such, this is the call to action on the formation of unions of Federationist Associations known as a Federationist League, and a union of Federationist Leagues to be known as the International Federationist League. Federationist Associations shall operate at the most local levels of society in order to aid individual communities. From there local Federationist Associations shall federate freely with each other, creating an interconnected and decentralized network of mutual aid and revolutionary praxis.. A Federationist League shall be a decentralized federation of local Federationist Associations which will seek to act in coordinated unity with itself to spread federationist theory and enact federationist praxis. Federationist Leagues should ideally operate on a regional or national level depending on a variety of factors such as population and the logistics of voluntary cooperation. Federationist organizations can in accordance with the principles of a decentralized federation work with any other federationist organization as is seen fit or necessary, with no truly prescribed way of structuring a union of federationist organizations. </p>
<p> Federationist Leagues and Associations will seek to enact praxis at various levels of society and across communities. Acting as a catalyst for the spreading of revolutionary attitudes and federationist theory, and engaging in praxis to materially improve the condition of the exploited classes. Federationist Leagues are to maintain focus on the triad of praxis in accordance with building a prepared revolution. However, Federationist Leagues shall also enter into a New United Front. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>New United Front</div>
<p> The threat of fascism and reactionary ideology is on the rise at this present time. Around the world there is a growing need for a dedicated bulwark against the far-right, to protect our communities, to protect our loved ones, and to protect our dreams of a better world. It has become absolutely necessary to be ready to defend against and to fight against fascists and reactionaries. As such it is paramount that a New United Front be formed to combat fascism and other reactionary ideologies. </p>
<p> Federationist Leagues should seek to work with, and ultimately create decentralized networks with other libertarian leftist tendencies and organizations in order to work on the shared goal to oppose reactionary ideology and movements. Federationists should work with others to create this New United Front, as it allows for greater solidarity to be built up between anti-authoritarian tendencies, and allow for joint praxis to protect us all. </p>
<p> Federationists should seek out other libertarian socialist groups and organizations to form a New United Front with, provided that such groups and organizations are ultimately revolutionary in their aims and eschew electoralism as a strategy. All groups in a New United Front should understand that revolutionary potential lies in acting as a catalyst for spreading social and class consciousness. Trying to actively incite revolution, particularly through violent acts, would only create a premature revolutionary attempt that is far easier to crush and will incite specific and targeted repression from the state. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Bob Black – The Ballad of Brenda Spencer
Thu, 11 Mar 2021 15:00:04 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Bob Black<br><strong>Title</strong>: The Ballad of Brenda Spencer<br><strong>Date</strong>: 1979<br><strong>Source</strong>:<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p> Monday morning, just another day <br /> Doing everything the teachers say <br /> Brenda’s tired of doing what she’s told <br /> Tired of being young and feeling old <br /> Brenda Spencer hasn’t lost her pride <br /> She gets off on pedagogicide! <br />
<p> Hear what Brenda’s got to say <br /> “Sniping livens up my day. <br /> I don’t like Mondays anyway!” <br /> Brenda’s tired of following the rules <br /> Tired of sucking up to evil fools <br /> Little did the grown-ups realize <br /> Brenda’s gonna cut them down to size! <br /> Rather than behave herself today <br /> Brenda blew the principal away! </p>
<p> Six long hours, half a day <br /> Brenda held the pigs at bay <br /> Wanna know the reason why? <br /> Brenda’d rather kill than die </p>
<p> All the experts say that Brenda’s sick <br /> They get paid to pull that dirty trick <br /> Teachers, don’t tell Brenda what to do <br /> She knows how to deal with scum like you <br /> Ah! the gladness, sadness, madness, fun <br /> Growing from the barrel of her gun! </p>
<p> Monday morning, just another day <br /> Doing everything the teachers say <br /> Brenda’s tired of doing what she’s told <br /> Tired of being young and feeling old <br /> Brenda Spencer hasn’t lost her pride <br /> She gets off on pedagogicide! </p>
<div class=”amw-teaser-no-ellipsis”></div>

Bob Black – The Myth of Human Rights
Wed, 10 Mar 2021 13:36:05 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Bob Black<br><strong>Title</strong>: The Myth of Human Rights<br><strong>Date</strong>: 2021<br><strong>Source</strong>: Submitted by the author.<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div class=”comment” style=”display:none”>#date Unpublished</div>
<div class=”comment” style=”display:none”>#source The author</div>
<div class=”comment” style=”display:none”>#notes I can’t tell if you have the earlier, much shorter version. This is to replace it.</div>
<div class=”comment” style=”display:none”>&lt;strong&gt;THE MYTH OF HUMAN RIGHTS&lt;/strong&gt;</div>
<div class=”comment” style=”display:none”>&lt;strong&gt;By Bob Black&lt;/strong&gt;</div>
<div class=”right”>
<p><em>We cannot use the “natural rights of man” nor the “theory of evolution.” <br />We can only use Western technology</em><br /> — Chairman Mao<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[1]</a></p>
<p> There are fashions in clothes and music. And there are fashions in politics. One current fashion in politics, all over the world, is human rights: “Human rights is the idea of our time.”<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[2]</a> Everybody likes human rights. Not everybody respects them. I will make the claim that human rights are <em>never</em> respected, <em>as</em> human rights. Because human rights have no objective reality, there is nothing to respect. Some humans are worthy of respect, but not their imaginary rights. </p>
<p> Today, it’s scandalous to disbelieve in human rights. A prominent social philosopher named Joel Feinberg is appalled that there are, as he says, “even extreme misanthropes who deny that anyone in fact has rights.”<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[3]</a> These extreme misanthropes would include Plato, Aristotle, Confucius, Jesus, Mohammed, Thomas Aquinas, Johann Gottlieb von Herder, Edmund Burke, William Godwin, Jeremy Bentham, Peter Kropotkin and Friedrich Nietzsche. Until about 500 years ago, everyone must have been an extreme misanthrope, which is certainly not how Jesus Christ and Prince Kropotkin, among others, are regarded. Nonetheless, Professor Feinberg’s writings have been hailed as “far-reaching and subtle”: they “achieve an unparalleled combination of rigor, sensitivity, and clarity.”<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[4]</a> Imagine what the rest of the philosophers must be like. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>I. Human Rights as Myths</div>
<p> Human rights, I maintain, are mythical. This might mean many things — one scholar compiled a list of over 50 definitions of myth.<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[5]</a> In many definitions, myths are a kind of story. That is true of the original meaning, but I will depart from it. I would distinguish “myth” (beliefs) from “mythology” or legends (stories). I will instead combine two other attributes drawn from different scholarly traditions. To say that something is mythical is, for me, to say two things.<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[6]</a> The first thing is that myths like human rights are beliefs which aren’t statements of fact. Myths are believed in by some, or they used to be believed in, but they were never true in the ordinary ways in which statements are true. </p>
<p> The second aspect of myth is that it serves political functions — specifically, to justify some social practice or movement or institution. This is the anthropologist Bronislaw Malinowski’s notion of the “mythical charter” of communities.<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[7]</a> In other words, “myth manufactures a sense of social belonging, a stratagem for social control.”<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[8]</a> I would extend this idea by adding that myth as a motivation is not confined to ideas supporting the status quo. It may provide a charter for imagined as well as for actual communities. Nationalist myths have justified nations before they came into existence.<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[9]</a> The cause of proletarian revolution has involved some myths. Their purpose is to validate and to incite. Georges Sorel frankly characterized the General Strike as an inspirational myth for class-conscious revolutionary workers.<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[10]</a> It was not inspirational for long,<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[11]</a> in part because, to make the point more generally, “institutions into which an element of myth enters may fulfill their functions better if these are not made too conscious, nor too many questions asked about them.”<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[12]</a></p>
<p> Myth in this sense resembles the Marxist conception of ideology. Sorel’s General Strike, an enthusiasm which he soon abandoned,<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[13]</a> is perhaps an example of what Gilbert Ryle wrote: “Myths often do a lot of theoretical good, while they are still new.”<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[14]</a> Although this particular myth, and the syndicalism which it informed, if they ever did any good, exhausted their possibilities a hundred years ago. </p>
<p> Thus the Bible contains many myths. It’s a myth that Jewish priests “discovered” the Book of Leviticus, which fortuitously bestowed a lot of power on Jewish priests. It’s a myth because it isn’t true, and because it justified the power of the priesthood until the Romans destroyed the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 A.D. </p>
<p> The story told by the Gospels also satisfies the criteria.<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[15]</a> It’s a myth that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that He rose from the dead. It’s false, because there is no God; and because the resurrection of the dead is impossible; and because the idea of the Creator of the Universe having a son is as ridiculous as the idea that He has an uncle. What, in addition, makes it mythical, is that the story functioned to justify the power of a new priesthood, the Roman Catholic Church, and also regimes in many authoritarian states. In the 1940s there was a best-selling book, and in the 1960s a movie, about Jesus, titled <em>The Greatest Story Ever Told.<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[16]</a></em> I’ve described this same story as the Greatest Story Ever Sold.<a class=”footnote” href=”#”>[17]</a> It is, in my usage, mythical and it is also mythology. I hope that someday it is only mythology, like the stories about the Olympian gods. As myths die out, mythology sets in. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Sanya Sethi – Anarcha Feminism
Wed, 10 Mar 2021 11:56:55 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Sanya Sethi<br><strong>Title</strong>: Anarcha Feminism<br><strong>Subtitle</strong>: The Beginning Of The End Of All Forms Of Oppression<br><strong>Date</strong>: February 3, 2020<br><strong>Source</strong>: Retrieved on 2021-03-10 from <a class=”text-amuse-link text-amuse-is-single-link” href=””></a><br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>What Is Anarcha Feminism?</div>
<p><em>Anarcha – Feminism</em> has been defined as,”…<em>being against oppression, domination and authority, but focusing on gender oppression, not because it is most important, but because it affects so many of us and must be dealt with. Gender oppression includes patriarchy, sexism, homophobia, heterosexism, heteronormativity, transphobia, the gender binary, fatphobia, sexual violence, body image issues etc</em>.” </p>
<p> It is a political philosophy and movement whose goal is not only to abolish the capitalist state, but also all forms of patriarchal domination. It focuses on placing women’s emancipation at the center of the struggle towards achieving the goals laid out by the anarchist theory. It also attempts to develop the understanding of women’s roles in creating relationships free of subordination and oppression. </p>
<p> Anarcha feminists do not see the goals of feminism as distinct from anarchism, but they see feminism as a form of anarchism and vice versa. For them, “…<em>the struggle against patriarchy is an inherent part of the struggle to abolish the state and abolish capitalism, as they believe that the state itself is a patriarchal structure</em>.” It is described to be an anti-authoritarian, anti-capitalist, anti-oppressive philosophy, with the goal of creating an “equal ground” between all genders. Anarcha feminism suggests the social freedom and liberty of women without dependence upon other groups or parties. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>A Brief History: The World And India</div>
<p> The term anarchist-feminist, later used interchangeably as anarcha-feminist / anarcho-feminist, emanates from 17<sup>th</sup> century state theory, the Marxist theory of state which upholds the concept of withering away of the state, and of course the extensive literature of the anarchist political theory. It first appeared in an August 1970 issue of the Berkele- based movement newspaper called <em>It Ain’t Me Babe</em>. It was first defined and created by women who saw radical feminism itself as a form of anarchy. </p>
<p> Radical feminists opposed the “male domineering attitude” and “male hierarchical thought patterns.” During the 1970’s, when there was a rapid growth of small leaderless consciousness raising groups in many countries across the world, a corresponding theory of radical feminism developed that opposed domination, mostly after discovering anarchism through the writings of Emma Goldman and observed the “intuitive anarchism” of the women’s liberation movement. </p>
<p> Early anarcha-feminist theory and debate emerged through <em>Siren</em> newsletter. The first issue, produced as a journal in 1971, contained “Who We Are: The Anarcho-Feminist Manifesto“. The manifesto focused on differentiating anarcha feminism from socialist feminism through a critique of the state: “<em>We believe that a Woman’s Revolutionary Movement must not mimic, but destroy, all vestiges of the male-dominated power structure, the State itself — with its whole ancient and dismal apparatus of jails, armies, and armed robbery (taxation); with all its murder; with all of its grotesque and repressive legislation and military attempts, internal and external, to interfere with people’s private lives and freely-chosen co-operative ventures.</em>” The manifesto laid down many things which revealed what should and should not be expected. </p>
<p> In India, the vestiges of anarcha feminism can be traced in the feminist movement in the 1970’s and 1980’s. During that time, the failure of the Indian state to deliver the basic needs of people lead to a widespread resistance by the workers, peasants, middle class and women. However, the Indian state responded in 1975 by declaring a state of Emergency that took away all the civil and political rights of the citizens. Consequently, the women’s movement in the 1970’s emerged along with other left and democratic forces. </p>
<p> In the years that followed, the women’s movement identified complex structures of domination and saw some of its greatest achievements through legal reforms. Indian feminists began questioning the established power structures and realized that the feminist questioning of patriarchy necessarily challenges the state, caste, class, community, household, family and marriage. Opposition to the traditional concepts of family, education and gender roles is an important aspect of anarcha feminism. The institution of marriage is also widely opposed. Thus, Indian women challenging such power structures during that time indicates their touch with anarcha feminism. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”>Why Is It Important?</div>
<p> When we talk about anarcha feminism, a common question that pops up is – “<em>Why is this relevant if anarchists and feminists already oppose sexism?”</em> History tells us that being an anarchist doesn’t make one automatically non-sexist; similarly, being a feminist doesn’t necessarily make one opposed to other forms of dominance and violence. This is why anarcha feminism becomes important. Anarchists must also oppose sexism, patriarchy, casteism, racism, along with authority, hierarchy and all forms of oppression. </p>
<p> The anarcha-feminist politics is a way of prioritizing feminism and anti-oppression in individual and collective struggles. Therefore, it is necessary for feminists to struggle for anarchy as no form of hierarchy and domination that decides power relations is acceptable. There are considerable synergies between feminist notions of social justice and social change as well as anarchist conceptions of revolutions, which deserve far more attention than they currently receive. </p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>

Tiqqun – A Critical Metaphysics Could Emerge as a Science of Apparatuses
Mon, 08 Mar 2021 14:32:13 +0100
<div><strong>Author</strong>: Tiqqun<br><strong>Title</strong>: A Critical Metaphysics Could Emerge as a Science of Apparatuses<br><strong>Date</strong>: 2001<br><div><div dir=”ltr”>
<p><em>“The first philosophies furnished power with its formal structure. More precisely speaking, ‘metaphysics’ designates the apparatus whose actuation requires a principle: associating words, things, and actions. At the time of the Turning Point, when presence as ultimate identity turns into presence as irreducible difference, its actuation appears to be without principle.”</em></p>
<p> – Reiner Schürmann, “What is to be made of the end of metaphysics?” </p>
<p> ~ This text was the document written for the foundation of the SASC, the Society for the Advancement of Criminal Science. The SASC is a non-profit dedicated to the anonymous collection, classification, and diffusion of all knowledge-powers useful to anti-imperial war machines. </p>
<p> ~ At the beginning there was the vision, on some floor or other of one of those sinister glass beehives of the tertiary sector; an endless vision through the panopticized space, of dozens of <em>seated</em> bodies, in line, distributed according to a modular kind of logic; dozens of bodies apparently without any life to them, separated by thin glass walls, tapping away on their computers. In this vision, in turn, there was a revelation of the brutally <em>political</em> character of this forced immobilization of bodies. And the obvious but paradoxical fact of these bodies being all the more immobile as their mental functions were activated, captivated, <em>mobilized,</em> as they bustled and responded in real time to the fluctuations of the information flows crossing the screens. We went with this vision, <em>taking what we’d found in it</em>, and we spread it around at an exposition at the MoMA in New York, where enthusiastic cyberneticians, freshly converted to making artistic excuses, had resolved to present to the public all their apparatuses for neutralization and normalization by work that they’d come up with for the future. The exposition was called <em>Workspheres</em>: they were demonstrating how an iMac can transform work, which itself had become as superfluous as it was intolerable, into leisure; how a “convivial” environment can make the average Bloom more disposed towards coping with the most desolate existence and can maximize his social output; or how PEOPLE might arrange things in such a way as to ensure that said Bloom’s tendencies towards anxiety could be done away with once all the parameters of his physiology, his habits and his character had been integrated into his personalized workspace. From the concurrence of these “visions” one got the feeling that PEOPLE had finally managed to <em>produce</em> minds, and to produce bodies as waste, as inert and cumbersome masses, the condition for — but above all the <em>obstacle to</em> — the progress of <em>purely cerebral</em> processes. The chair, the desk, the computer: it could all become just part of an apparatus. A search-and-seizure of production. A methodical enterprise for attenuating all forms-of-life. Jünger spoke of a kind of “spiritualization of the world,” but in <em>not necessarily so flattering</em> a sense<em>.</em></p>
<p> We can imagine another beginning, another genesis. This time, at the beginning, there was an inconvenience; an annoyance linked to the general spread of surveillance machinery in the shops, specifically to the anti-theft gates. There was a slight anxiety at the moment one passed through them, not knowing whether they were going to go off or not, whether we’d be picked out of the anonymous flow of consumers as “an undesirable customer,” as “thieves.” And so there was the annoyance — who knows, maybe the resentment? — of getting yelled at once in a while, and the clear foreknowledge that these apparatuses indeed had for some time now <em>actually been working</em>. That the task of surveillance, for example, was more and more exclusively confided to a mass of watchmen <em>who knew what to look for</em>, because they themselves were former thieves. Who in all their gestures were merely <em>walking human apparatuses.</em></p>
<p> Now let’s imagine a really improbable kind of genesis for the sake of the most incredulous. Here the starting point would be the question of <em>determinity,</em> the fact that there is, unavoidably, predetermination; but that this inevitability could <em>also</em> take on the sense of a formidable freedom: <em>playing</em> with the determinations. An inflationist subversion of cybernetic control. </p>
<p> All in all, at the beginning there was nothing. Nothing but <br /> the refusal to innocently play along with any of the games that PEOPLE had planned to manipulate us with. </p>
<p> And — who knows? – the FIERCE </p>
<p> desire to perhaps </p>
<p> dizzy a few of them. </p>
<div style=”font-weight:bold”><strong>I.</strong></div>
<p> What exactly is going on in <em>Bloom Theory?</em> It’s an attempt to <em>historicize</em> presence, to acknowledge the present state of our being-in-the-world, as a start. There had been other attempts of the same nature before <em>Bloom Theory</em>, the most remarkable after Heidegger’s <em>Fundamental Concepts in Metaphysics</em> certainly being De Martino’s <em>The Magical World</em>. It was sixty years before <em>Bloom Theory</em> when this Italian anthropologist made his contribution to the history of presence, which until today remains unequalled. But that’s where the philosophers and anthropologists <em>ended up</em>, with the observation of where we’re at relative to the world, with the observation of our own collapse; and we’ll grant them that, because we’re <em>starting from there.</em></p>
<p class=”amw-teaser-ellipsis”>…</p>